MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405793320 · doi:10.22055/jacm.2022.39470.3412

Refined Cross-sample Entropy based on Freedman-Diaconis Rule: Application to Foreign Exchange Time Series

2022· article· en· W4405793320 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Javier E. Contreras‐Reyes

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFreedmanSeries (stratigraphy)Sample entropyMathematicsEntropy (arrow of time)Statistical physicsStatisticsTime seriesThermodynamicsGeologyHistoryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shang et al. (Commun. Nonlinear Sci. 94, 105556, 2022) proposed an efficient and robust synchronization estimation between two not necessarily stationary time series, namely the refined cross-sample entropy (RCSE). This method considered the empirical cumulative distribution function of distances using histogram estimator. In contrast to classical cross-sample entropy, RCSE only depends on a fixed embedding dimension parameter. In this paper, the RCSE is revisited as Freedman-Diaconis rule was considered to estimate the number of bins for the cumulative distribution function. Results are illustrated with some simulations based on 2D Hénon maps, the sinusoidal model, and the Lorenz attractor. In addition, a practical study of foreign exchange rate time series is presented. Specifically, the Canadian/US and Singaporean/US dollar time series were considered to compute the synchrony level between the 1995-1998 (before the 1999 Asian financial crisis) and the 1999-2003 (post-crisis) periods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.128
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicMarket Dynamics and Volatility→French-language works237,207→