MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6925410728 · doi:10.17632/493dbf98zx

Data for Paper: The Impact of the Yield Curve on the Equity Returns of Insurance Companies

2020· dataset· en· W6925410728 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMendeley Data · 2020
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Processing and 3D Reconstruction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYield curveEquity (law)Yield (engineering)Sample (material)Interest rateInsurance policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data for Paper: The Impact of the Yield Curve on the Equity Returns of Insurance Companies This study uses monthly data for all insurance companies listed on the major U.S. and Canadian public equity markets (NYSE, NASDAQ, and TSX) over the period between January 2000 and June 2019. This provides a sample of ninety-five U.S. insures and eight Canadian insurers. The monthly returns for both the U.S. and Canadian insurers are obtained through DataStream. The Fama-French factors, which include the market, size, and value factors, are obtained via AQR for the U.S. and Canada, respectively. The reasoning for obtaining these factors from AQR as opposed to Kenneth French’s website is because AQR has specific factors for Canada, while the Kenneth French website only has North American or Global factors to apply to the Canadian data. The interest rate data for the U.S. is obtained via the U.S. Federal Reserve Economic Database (FRED) and for Canada through Statistics Canada (Table 10-10-0122-01). Various interest rates are obtained to measure the various section of the term structure in both countries. These include the 3-month treasury, the two-, five- ten- and twenty-year notes and bonds.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.024

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMendeley DataSame topicImage Processing and 3D ReconstructionFrench-language works237,207