Wasserstein-Barycentric Interaction Fields for Spatial Factor Models: Evidence from Language-Model Representations
Marcus Gawronsky, Chun-Sung Huang
University of Cape Town
Published August 30, 2026 · on the feed September 3, 2026 · arXiv 2608.29669
The abstract
Spatial return models take the interaction matrix as given and leave feedback uninterpreted. We construct a bandwidth-free field from firms' language-model article embedding distributions using target-anchored Wasserstein barycentric reconstruction. A quadratic exposure-adjustment problem maps feedback into a peer-misalignment penalty ratio. For 52 firms, the field, frozen from 2018-2022 news, yields a 2023-2026 penalty ratio of 3.46 (95% interval [2.89, 4.17]) and higher conditional quasi-likelihood than equal-weighted peer support or RBF weighting of the same distances. Joint penalty ratios for the barycentric and news co-mention fields are 2.33 and 0.86 with boundary calibrated tests which reject both exclusions.
The Brief
1:54A short podcast summary of the paper. Written and voiced by AI.
Transcript
Wasserstein-Barycentric Interaction Fields for Spatial Factor Models. Evidence from Language-Model Representations. By Marcus Gawronsky and one other, from the University of Cape Town. Published on the thirtieth of August. No code repository is linked to it.
Spatial return models describe how the returns of firms affect one another through an interaction matrix. Two things are left unexamined in that setup. The matrix is taken as given, and the feedback it produces is left uninterpreted.
This work builds the interaction structure instead of assuming it. The starting material is language-model embeddings of news articles about each firm, treated not as a single point per firm but as a distribution. From those distributions the authors construct a field using target-anchored Wasserstein barycentric reconstruction. The field is bandwidth-free.
The second step addresses interpretation. A quadratic exposure-adjustment problem maps the feedback into a single number, a peer-misalignment penalty ratio, which can be estimated and tested.
The test uses fifty-two firms. The field is frozen from news covering two thousand eighteen to two thousand twenty-two, then applied to the period from two thousand twenty-three to two thousand twenty-six. Over that later window the penalty ratio is three point four six, with a ninety-five percent interval from two point eight nine to four point one seven. The field also gives higher conditional quasi-likelihood than two alternatives built on the same distances: equal-weighted peer support, and RBF weighting.
A joint model includes both the barycentric field and a field built from news co-mentions. Their penalty ratios are two point three three and zero point eight six. Boundary calibrated tests reject excluding either one.
The evidence comes from one panel of fifty-two firms and one construction. Within that, both fields carry information the other does not, and the interaction matrix stops being an assumption and becomes something read out of text.
Paper Quest · 7 chapters · about 41 min
Play this paper
Learn it by doing: make the calls the authors made, guess the result before you see it, and defend it in a viva graded on your own words. Chapter 1 is right here.
Chapter 1 🧩 · The problem
Every quest starts with a wall. Here it is a matrix the models take as given and never explain.
You model stock returns where each firm is pulled by its peers. The model needs a matrix saying who counts as a peer, and how much; researchers usually just supply one from geography, industry or supply chains.
The road ahead
- 1 · The problem ~7 min Return models with peer pull need a peer matrix that researchers simply supply, and the feedback they estimate has no clear economic meaning.
- 2 · What came before ~3 min
- 3 · The key idea ~9 min Treat each firm as a cloud of news embeddings, rebuild each cloud from a weighted mix of peers' clouds, and read feedback as a penalty ratio.
- 4 · Choose your own research ~3 min
- 5 · Build the method ~8 min Embed each firm's news, rebuild every firm from weighted peers, freeze that field, then estimate the penalty ratio on later returns.
- 6 · The experiment ~6 min You’ll guess: In a joint model holding both the barycentric field and a news co-mention field, which kept the larger penalty ratio?
- 7 · The viva ~5 min Three questions from the examiners, answered in your own words. Win it for the paper’s trophy.
Free, with Google or an email address. Your stars and progress are kept.