MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7101403555 · doi:10.58567/fel04020001

Tariff Shadows: Mapping Higher-Order Moment Spillovers Across Global Equity Markets

2025· article· en· W7101403555 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFinancial Economics Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHeat shock proteins research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaZhejiang Gongshang University
KeywordsVolatility (finance)Equity (law)Spillover effectStock (firearms)TariffReciprocalStock market

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines how risk spreads among G7 and BRICS stock markets, focusing not only on volatility but also on higher-order statistical moments (skewness and kurtosis). We analyze how Trump's reciprocal tariff policies affected global market connections. Using a comprehensive spillover framework, we find that different types of risk behave differently across markets. For volatility spillovers, Germany is the main source while China and Japan receive the most risk. For higher-moment risks, the U.S. and Canada spread the highest risk, with Japan and India being the primary receivers. After Trump implemented reciprocal tariffs, risk transmission across global stock markets increased sharply. Volatility spillovers showed the largest increase, but higher-moment risk transmission also rose significantly, indicating that extreme market events became more interconnected globally.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFinancial Economics LettersSame topicHeat shock proteins researchFrench-language works237,207