MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026988118 · doi:10.5539/jms.v2n2p35

Ethical Portfolio Theory: A New Course

2012· article· en· W2026988118 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carla Barracchini, Maria Elena Addessi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Sustainability · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPortfolioModern portfolio theoryReputationSelection (genetic algorithm)Reading (process)Index (typography)Coherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Actuarial scienceApplication portfolio managementComputer scienceEngineering ethicsEconomicsSociologyFinancial economicsProject portfolio managementManagementPolitical scienceArtificial intelligenceSocial scienceMathematicsEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims at proposing a re-reading of the Portfolio Selection by means of an extension of the risk/return analysis, thus taking into account the investors’ choice that meets the ethical principles of an individual. We aim at describing the portfolio selection realized on the basis of the static ethical index (Barracchini, 2007). We also aim at presenting a dynamic ethical index by the definition of those functions we will call ethical reputation and ethical coherence.

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)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations11
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and SustainabilitySame topicFinancial Markets and Investment StrategiesFrench-language works237,207