Goal achieving probabilities of cone‐constrained mean‐variance portfolios
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we establish closed‐form formulas for key probabilistic properties of the cone‐constrained optimal mean‐variance strategy, in a continuous market model driven by a multidimensional Brownian motion and deterministic coefficients. In particular, we compute the probability to obtain to a point, during the investment horizon, where the accumulated wealth is large enough to be fully reinvested in the money market, and safely grow there to meet the investor's financial goal at terminal time. We conclude that the result of Li and Zhou [ Ann. Appl. Prob. , v.16, pp.1751–1763, (2006)] in the unconstrained case carries over when conic constraints are present: the former probability is lower bounded by 80% no matter the market coefficients, trading constraints, and investment goal. We also compute the expected terminal wealth given that the investor's goal is underachieved, for both the mean‐variance strategy and the aforementioned hybrid strategy where transfer to the money market occurs if it allows to safely achieve the goal. The former probabilities and expectations are also provided in the case where all risky assets held are liquidated if financial distress is encountered. These results provide investors with novel practical tools to support portfolio decision‐making and analysis. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".