Short-term trend-following PnL collapsed post-2008 on small-tick futures due to HFT liquidity withdrawal breaking the market-impact feedback loop, while large-tick contracts remain unaffected.
Title resolution pending
4 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
4
Pith papers citing it
years
2026 4verdicts
UNVERDICTED 4representative citing papers
A normative-descriptive framework shows LLMs' tool-calling perceptions misalign with true need/utility for web search, and hidden-state estimators improve decisions over self-perceived baselines.
A randomized field experiment finds that limiting downward overrides to two per machine reduces inventory by 1.28% without sales loss by prompting workers to select higher-value SKUs for intervention.
The paper defines algorithmic contestability as identifying evidence to overturn potentially incorrect decisions and identifies three types of such evidence that make decisions normatively indefensible under the decision maker's standards.
citing papers explorer
-
Is Trend Still Your Friend?: A Microstructural Account of the Demise of Short-Term Trend-Following
Short-term trend-following PnL collapsed post-2008 on small-tick futures due to HFT liquidity withdrawal breaking the market-impact feedback loop, while large-tick contracts remain unaffected.
-
To Call or Not to Call: A Framework to Assess and Optimize LLM Tool Calling
A normative-descriptive framework shows LLMs' tool-calling perceptions misalign with true need/utility for web search, and hidden-state estimators improve decisions over self-perceived baselines.
-
A Simple Solution to Improving Human Supervision of Algorithms: Evidence from Smart Vending
A randomized field experiment finds that limiting downward overrides to two per machine reduces inventory by 1.28% without sales loss by prompting workers to select higher-value SKUs for intervention.
-
Explainable AI Isn't Enough! Rethinking Algorithmic Contestability
The paper defines algorithmic contestability as identifying evidence to overturn potentially incorrect decisions and identifies three types of such evidence that make decisions normatively indefensible under the decision maker's standards.