MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007895608 · doi:10.1080/07474930600713234

Continuous Time Wishart Process for Stochastic Risk

2006· article· en· W2007895608 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEconometric Reviews · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWishart distributionStochastic volatilityInverse-Wishart distributionEconometricsMultivariate statisticsAutoregressive modelMathematicsVolatility (finance)Applied mathematicsEconomicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Risks are usually represented and measured by volatility–covolatility matrices. Wishart processes are models for a dynamic analysis of multivariate risk and describe the evolution of stochastic volatility–covolatility matrices, constrained to be symmetric positive definite. The autoregressive Wishart process (WAR) is the multivariate extension of the Cox, Ingersoll, Ross (CIR) process introduced for scalar stochastic volatility. As a CIR process it allows for closed-form solutions for a number of financial problems, such as term structure of T-bonds and corporate bonds, derivative pricing in a multivariate stochastic volatility model, and the structural model for credit risk. Moreover, the Wishart dynamics are very flexible and are serious competitors for less structural multivariate ARCH models.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.639
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.211 · 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