Search

Gold prices have been of major interest for a lot of investors, analysts, and economists. Accordingly, a number of different modeling approaches have been used to forecast gold prices. In this manuscript, the geometric Brownian motion approach, used in the pricing of numerous types of assets, is used to forecast the prices of gold at yearly, monthly, and quarterly frequencies. This approach allows for simulating one-period-ahead prices and the associated probabilities. The expected prices obtained from the simulated prices and probabilities are found to provide reliable forecasts when compared with the observed yearly, monthly, and quarterly prices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Denić (2018, 2019, To appear) observes that the availability of distributive inferences—for sentences with disjunction embedded in the scope of a universal quantifier—depends on the size of the domain quantified over as it relates to the number of disjuncts. Based on her observations, she argues that probabilistic considerations play a role in the computation of implicatures. In this paper we explore a different possibility. We argue for a modification of Denić's generalization, and provide an explanation that is based on intricate logical computations but is blind to probabilities. The explanation is based on the observation that when the domain size is no larger than the number of disjuncts, universal and existential alternatives are equivalent if distributive inferences are obtained. We argue that under such conditions a general ban on 'fatal competition' (Magri 2009a,b, Spector 2014) is activated, thereby predicting distributive inferences to be unavailable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Quetes Litteraires is the property of Katolicki Uniwersityt Lubelski Jana Pawla II, Wydzial Nauk Humanistycznych, Institut Filologii Romaj and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Demographers and other social scientists often study effect heterogeneity (defined here as differences in outcome-predictor associations across groups defined by the values of a third variable) to understand how inequalities evolve between groups or how groups differentially benefit from treatments. Yet answering the question "Is the effect larger in group A or group B?" is surprisingly difficult. In fact, the answer sometimes reverses across scales. For example, researchers might conclude that the effect of education on mortality is larger among women than among men if they quantify education's effect on an odds-ratio scale, but their conclusion might flip (to indicate a larger effect among men) if they instead quantify education's effect on a percentage-point scale. We illuminate this flipped-signs phenomenon in the context of nonlinear probability models, which were used in about one third of articles published in Demography in 2018-2019. Although methodologists are aware that flipped signs can occur, applied researchers have not integrated this insight into their work. We provide formal inequalities that researchers can use to easily determine if flipped signs are a problem in their own applications. We also share practical tips to help researchers handle flipped signs and, thus, generate clear and substantively correct descriptions of effect heterogeneity. Our findings advance researchers' ability to accurately characterize population variation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The notion focus affinity refers to the likelihood that a grammatical role (e.g., subject, object) is the narrow focus of a sentence. There is evidence that such differences exist at the level of distributional data. For example, subjects are less often focal and more often topical as compared to direct objects. However, it is not obvious whether focus affinity is genuinely related to grammatical roles. Focus affinity could be an epiphenomenon of various other linguistic and pragmatic processes or their interactions (e.g., direct objects are more often indefinite, less often animate, more often new than subjects). In our controlled experimental study, we investigate the focus affinity of three adjunct types (instruments, locatives, depictive secondary predicates) in Spanish and provide evidence that these grammatical roles indeed differ with respect to focus affinity. Depictives show the highest degree of focus affinity, followed by instruments and finally locatives. These effects are robust and stable even if we account for a number of possible alternative explanations. Thus, we suggest that focus affinity is a property sufficiently closely associated with grammatical roles to justify more attention both in theoretical linguistic and psycholinguistic literature. • Focus affinity is an understudied information structural concept. • Focus affinities of three adjunct types have been experimentally investigated. • Focus hierarchy: Depictives > Instruments > Locatives. • Differences between grammatical roles are robust even if we consider alternative explanations (e.g., probabilities). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Habanera de Ciencias Médicas is the property of Universidad de Ciencias Medicas de La Habana and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)