Volatility patterns of stock prices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on stock exchange markets is essential to stock market investors as it offers sensitivities to risk management. This research investigates the patterns of the volatility of stock market prices in ten African stock markets. We estimated the dynamic GARCH model of Engle using the method of maximum likelihood estimation. Daily time series from January 1, 2021 to December 30, 2022, were obtained from African Stock (Securities) Exchange database. The findings established the existence of a normally distributed Senegalese stock market as against time-varying volatility of stock prices in Nigeria, Ghana, Mali, Burkina Faso, Togo, Niger Republic, Benin Republic, Ivory Coast, and Gambian. Hence, the likelihood that an asset or stock is being overpriced (overvalued) or underpriced (undervalued) in the Senegal stock market is low. It is therefore easier for stock traders and investors in Senegal to pick entry and exit points. Unfortunately, this cannot be said of the investors in stock markets of other countries. In effect, the closing price of a stock is most often heavily deviated with significant outliers. This further infers that variations of stock prices in these markets are very wide, heavy, and unpredicted. Hence, it is a case of the volatility of volatilities.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".