MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1854056485 · doi:10.1109/istcs.1993.253458

The mortgage problem

2002· article· en· W1854056485 on OpenAlexaff
Ran El‐Yaniv, Richard M. Karp

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Search Problems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetitive analysisLine (geometry)Interest rateSequence (biology)Database transactionEconomicsComputer scienceUpper and lower boundsMathematical economicsActuarial scienceMonetary economicsMathematicsChemistryDatabaseMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mortgage refinancing is a complex real-life problem involving a sequence of decisions, each of which requires a trade-off between the transaction cost associated with refinancing and the benefit of obtaining a lower interest rate. The authors present a simplified mathematical model of this problem. Within this model, they seek to determine the best possible competitive ratio achievable by an on-line mortgage refinancing policy. The main results are the following: under the assumption that the initial mortgage is obtained with an interest rate M and that future interest rates cannot decrease below m>or=0, they show a lower bound r= Omega (/sup 1nM///sub (m+1)lnlnM/) on the competitive ratio of any mortgage refinancing policy. Then they give an on-line policy that is optimal in some special cases, including the cases m=0 and M>

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.002

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations10
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptimization and Search ProblemsFrench-language works237,207