SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Kumer Das

Publications and source records attributed to Kumer Das.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Quantifying the impact of COVID-19 on the US stock market: An analysis from multi-source information

We develop a novel temporal complex network approach to quantify the US county level spread dynamics of COVID-19. The objective is to study the effects of the local spread dynamics, COVID-19 cases and death, and Google search activities on the US stock market. We use both conventional econometric and Machine Learning (ML) models. The results suggest that COVID-19 cases and deaths, its local spread, and Google searches have impacts on abnormal stock prices between January 2020 to May 2020. In addition, incorporating information about local spread significantly improves the performance of forecasting models of the abnormal stock prices at longer forecasting horizons. On the other hand, although a few COVID-19 related variables, e.g., US total deaths and US new cases exhibit causal relationships on price volatility, COVID-19 cases and deaths, local spread of COVID-19, and Google search activities do not have impacts on price volatility.

q-fin.ST

The reliability of an environmental epidemiology meta-analysis, a case study

Summary Background Claims made in science papers are coming under increased scrutiny with many claims failing to replicate. Meta-analysis studies that use unreliable observational studies should be in question. We examine the reliability of the base studies used in an air quality/heart attack meta-analysis and the resulting meta-analysis. Methods A meta-analysis study that includes 14 observational air quality/heart attack studies is examined for its statistical reliability. We use simple counting to evaluate the reliability of the base papers and a p-value plot of the p-values from the base studies to examine study heterogeneity. Findings We find that the based papers have massive multiple testing and multiple modeling with no statistical adjustments. Statistics coming from the base papers are not guaranteed to be unbiased, a requirement for a valid meta-analysis. There is study heterogeneity for the base papers with strong evidence for so called p-hacking. Interpretation We make two observations: there are many claims at issue in each of the 14 base studies so uncorrected multiple testing is a serious issue. We find the base papers and the resulting meta-analysis are unreliable.

stat.AP