MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Improving Skewness of Mean-Variance Portfolios

2010· article· en· W1997198130 on OpenAlexafffund
Luis F. Zuluaga, Samuel H. Cox

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Actuarial Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Portfolio Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFlinders University
KeywordsSkewnessEfficient frontierComputer sciencePortfolioVariance (accounting)Context (archaeology)Asset allocationEconometricsPortfolio optimizationAsset (computer security)Product (mathematics)Actuarial scienceMathematical optimizationEconomicsMathematicsFinancial economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The widely accepted belief that asset returns and insurance product line margins are not normally distributed has motivated the use of skewness (or higher than second-order moments) in the context of optimal risk-reward portfolio allocation. Here we propose an optimization-based methodology to substantially improve the skewness of portfolios in the mean-variance efficient frontier. Unlike other related methods, the proposed methodology is very intuitive, noniterative, and simple to implement, and it can be readily and efficiently carried out using state-of-the-art optimization solvers. These characteristics should be very appealing to risk managers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.598

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Actuarial JournalSame topicRisk and Portfolio OptimizationFrench-language works237,207