<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Some stuff &#187; yesterday</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.yhuang.org/?feed=rss2&#038;tag=yesterday" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://blog.yhuang.org</link>
	<description>here.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2025 08:50:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>yield curve based on yield curve</title>
		<link>https://blog.yhuang.org/?p=243</link>
		<comments>https://blog.yhuang.org/?p=243#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 06:51:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[close]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[curve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[models]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[short term rates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[start]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[treasury]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yesterday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yield]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yield curve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yield curves]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scripts.mit.edu/~zong/wpress/?p=243</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It occured to me the other day that based on certain models of the yield curve, it should make predictions about itself. It would be interesting to know how often it has been correct though. As a start, we can convert the daily yield curve into implied short-term rates in the future. For instance, using [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It occured to me the other day that based on certain models of the yield curve, it should make predictions about itself. It would be interesting to know how often it has been correct though.</p>
<p>As a start, we can convert the daily yield curve into implied short-term rates in the future. For instance, using the treasury yields as published <a href="http://www.ustreas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/debt-management/interest-rate/yield.shtml">here</a> yesterday, we get these implied average rates over certain durations:<br />
<img src="wp-content/uploads/images/yields1.png" /><br />
<span id="more-243"></span><br />
It says that the short-term rates will rise at about 1% per year and in five years it will stabilize at around 5%. Here is a close up at the short end.<br />
<img src="wp-content/uploads/images/yields2.png" /></p>
<p>And these translate into the following &#8220;standard&#8221; yield curves at 6 months (blue) and 1 year (green) from now, compared to currently (red).<br />
<img src="wp-content/uploads/images/yields3.png" /></p>
<p>There is no guarantee that this will be correct (that is something that needs to be checked against past data), but I distinctly recall that within the past two years the yield curves have, as a rule, been overly optimistic (too steep) on the short end.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://blog.yhuang.org/?feed=rss2&#038;p=243</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>hilly Seattle</title>
		<link>https://blog.yhuang.org/?p=50</link>
		<comments>https://blog.yhuang.org/?p=50#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2007 08:26:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crown hill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[denny hill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[image]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[retreating glaciers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[seattle seattle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[south axis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[steep]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yesterday]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scripts.mit.edu/~zong/wpress/?p=50</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Seattle is really long in the north-south axis. Not only that, anybody who has been in Seattle for a while will notice that lots of interesting geographic features run along the north-south axis, like, hills, peninsulas, and lakes. I&#8217;m just guessing that retreating glaciers had something to do with it. Hills, yes. Yesterday I drove [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="wp-content/uploads/images/seattle_elevation.png" align="right" />Seattle is really long in the north-south axis. Not only that, anybody who has been in Seattle for a while will notice that lots of interesting geographic features run along the north-south axis, like, hills, peninsulas, and lakes. I&#8217;m just guessing that retreating glaciers had something to do with it.</p>
<p>Hills, yes.</p>
<p>Yesterday I drove up a fairly steep hill called Phinney Ridge (really quite steep, but not super steep by Seattle standards). I was also going west, so suddenly I was reminded of this geographic and geologic fact of Seattle and thought &#8230; &#8220;Yeah, I must be hitting a large gradient against one of these hill-spines. Gee, it&#8217;s even called a &#8216;ridge.&#8217; Wonder if I can skirt around it,&#8221; and so on.</p>
<p>In fact there are lots of descriptive place names that didn&#8217;t register with me &#8212; like, what is &#8220;Capitol Hill&#8221; anyway? &#8212; until I saw this image. I cut it out of the <a href="http://seamless.usgs.gov">USGS data site</a>, where you can play around with such things to your heart&#8217;s content. (I also took two looks at <a href="http://www.topozone.com">topozone.com</a> but decided they sucked.)</p>
<p>Seattle is supposed to be built originally on &#8220;seven&#8221; &#8220;hills,&#8221; (c.f. Rome) and I labeled them here in red numbers 1-7: First Hill, Capitol Hill, Queen Anne, Magnolia, Beacon Hill, Denny Hill (razed early on), and Crown Hill. I call BS on the seven hills theory. Not only do some of these &#8220;hills&#8221; not look like distinct hills, some of them aren&#8217;t even that impressive. There are lots more hills around &#8230; and Crown Hill looks sorely out of place, like an after-thought to make the number 7.</p>
<p>I haven&#8217;t really been everywhere in Seattle, so I can&#8217;t say where the hills are the steepest &#8212; they probably keep records of this. Where I have been though &#8230; some parts of the eastern ridge of Capitol Hill (green 1), the Downtown (green 2), and Magnolia have made for hair-raising experiences in a manual transmission car. By comparison, Phinney Ridge (green 3) really isn&#8217;t so bad.</p>
<p>The only really flat part of Seattle is the industrial/stadium/international district along the shores of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duwamish_River">Duwamish River</a>, which can be seen in the image, flanked by West Seattle and Beacon Hill. Seattle could have developed along the only river in the city: Seattle was almost called Duwamps, after all &#8230; but no, people had to go live on hills instead of flat land (yeah ok fine, there was too little of it and it was an Asian ghetto from the days of <a href="?p=14">Chin Chun Hock</a>).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://blog.yhuang.org/?feed=rss2&#038;p=50</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
