Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines and compares intraday and intraweek patterns in hourly and daily prices, returns, volumes and volatility of native cryptocurrencies, stablecoins and tokens traded on Bitstamp. We show that native cryptocurrencies and tokens share common intraday periodicity determined by the operating times of the NYSE, LSE and Hang Seng stock exchange markets. Periodic patterns are also documented in the returns on cryptocurrency market portfolio approximated by the PCA applied to intraday and intraweek cross-sectional correlation matrices of cryptocurrency returns. Stablecoins have distinct dynamics and their daily and hourly returns are uncorrelated with one another and with the returns on other cryptocurrencies. We introduce a functional CAPM to accommodate the periodic patterns and estimate it by regressing the functions of intraday and intraweek cryptocurrency returns on the market portfolio. We show that the return functions on Bitcoin, Ether, and Link satisfy affine relationships with the return functions of the market portfolio and their functional betas display periodic intraday and intraweek patterns. • Native cryptocurrency and tokens share common periodic patterns. • Stablecoins have distinct intraday and intraweek dynamics. • The returns on stablecoins are uncorrelated with other cryptocurrencies. • Tokens contribute more to the risk on cryptocurrency market than other coins. • The betas in functional CAPM of cryptocurrency are periodic functions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".