MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1547689076

CDO Models - Towards the Next Generation: Incomplete Markets and Term Structure

2006· article· en· W1547689076 on OpenAlexaff
M. B. Walker

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCredit Risk and Financial Regulations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrancheArbitrageValuation (finance)EconometricsEconomicsFinancial economicsActuarial scienceFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes a new approach to the risk-neutral valuation of CDO tranches, based on a general specification of the tranche loss distributions and the index default distribution. The new model is a term-structure model, and the generality with which the basic distributions are specified allows it to be perfectly calibrated to any set of market prices (for any number of tranches and maturities) that is arbitrage-free. The use of the new model is illustrated by testing market prices for the standardized iTraxx index tranches (for all marketed tranches and maturities) to see if they are arbitrage-free. Other examples include the determination of the arbitrage-free range of prices allowed for an unmarketed standardized tranche and the determination of the cost of exiting a tranche position. For the latter example, both arbitrage-free price ranges, and a preferred price, are obtained. Prices for unmarketed maturities and unmarketed non-standard tranches are also obtained by an interpolation and extrapolation procedure. Because the model is an incomplete-market model characterized by many more parameters than market prices, it was essential to develop an efficient optimization approach to valuation. The article also makes use of a new approach to the problem of unequal recovery rates and notionals.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.129 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations17
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCredit Risk and Financial RegulationsFrench-language works237,207