These editions improve the writing, mathematical definitions, interpretation and internal reporting of two research papers. They preserve the original submissions and distinguish supported corrections from empirical questions that still require replication.
Revision scope. These are editorial portfolio editions informed by the published papers and recovered source material. The thesis edition is not a university resubmission or replacement of the original submitted thesis. No new model fits, trading backtests or bubble-test simulations were run. The revisions do not certify independent out-of-sample performance or newly verified bubble dates.
Volatility-Gated Momentum
An EGARCH-filtered intraday trading framework for equity-index and energy futures. The research asks how volatility information changes breakout-trade selection and exposure across Nasdaq 100, S&P 500 and WTI crude-oil futures.
Distinguished retrospective strategy development and chronological parameter selection from the requirements for a future independent evaluation. Full-sample volatility calibration is described explicitly.
Clarified that the main ablation changes both filtering and exposure control. Comparisons with realized volatility do not identify the effect of the asymmetry parameter alone.
Scoped bootstrap evidence to its reported development comparison and selection-bias diagnostics to the local candidate family. Corrected the deflated-Sharpe formula and checked its arithmetic using archived summary inputs.
Reconciled prose with the reported cost table, corrected table interpretation, and clarified return, downside-risk, leverage, session and execution definitions.
Identified remaining table, calendar and accounting differences without inventing replacement results.
What remains to be established
A common dated ledger is needed to reconcile trade and bar PnL, sample counts and appendix results. A further empirical revision should use historically available volatility estimates and calibration, explicit execution and rebalancing costs, and separate tests of the gate, position sizing and asymmetry. The earlier-period weak result remains part of the evidence.
Provenance: revised from the editable LaTeX source matching the 82-page published thesis. Later hybrid-strategy drafts were not substituted for this publication version. The original PDF is retained byte for byte.
The Surge of Bitcoin
Is It Just Another Tulip Mania? The seminar paper examines explosive price dynamics and how far those patterns can support a behavioral interpretation.
Distinguished the global GSADF statistic from the endpoint-specific BSADF sequence used to date episodes.
Clarified the ADF regression, window units, critical-value requirements and the limits of conventional inference under changing volatility.
Separated reported historical numbers from reproducible findings where the statistic plot, sample descriptions and return summaries do not reconcile.
Recast herding, attention and extrapolative expectations as possible interpretations requiring independent evidence.
Specified the data and testing information needed for replication, including dependence-aware return comparisons and uncertainty in regime labels.
What remains to be established
The empirical workflow must be recovered or rebuilt before exact episode dates, critical values, significance levels and regime-return comparisons can be treated as verified. Statistical explosiveness alone does not identify mispricing relative to fundamentals, a behavioral cause or an executable trading signal.
Provenance: a new editable reconstruction of the 22-page published PDF dated 20 December 2025. The original editable file and a reproducible test run were not recovered. The original PDF is retained byte for byte.