MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1496420080 · doi:10.1017/cbo9781107709393

Granularity Theory with Applications to Finance and Insurance

2014· book· en· W1496420080 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick Gagliardini, Christian Gouriéroux

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2014
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInsurance and Financial Risk Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGranularityActuarial scienceRisk managementPortfolioBasel IICredit riskVariety (cybernetics)Modern portfolio theorySystemic riskDerivative (finance)Computer scienceFinanceEconomicsBusinessRisk analysis (engineering)Capital requirementFinancial crisisMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent financial crisis has heightened the need for appropriate methodologies for managing and monitoring complex risks in financial markets. The measurement, management, and regulation of risks in portfolios composed of credits, credit derivatives, or life insurance contracts is difficult because of the nonlinearities of risk models, dependencies between individual risks, and the several thousands of contracts in large portfolios. The granularity principle was introduced in the Basel regulations for credit risk to solve these difficulties in computing capital reserves. In this book, authors Patrick Gagliardini and Christian Gouriéroux provide the first comprehensive overview of the granularity theory and illustrate its usefulness for a variety of problems related to risk analysis, statistical estimation, and derivative pricing in finance and insurance. They show how the granularity principle leads to analytical formulas for risk analysis that are simple to implement and accurate even when the portfolio size is large.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.160 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicInsurance and Financial Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207