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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper introduces nonlinear dynamic factor models for various applications related to risk analysis. Traditional factor models represent the dynamics of processes driven by movements of latent variables, called the factors. Our approach extends this setup by introducing factors defined as random dynamic parameters and stochastic autocorrelated simulators. This class of factor models can represent processes with time varying conditional mean, variance, skewness and excess kurtosis. Applications discussed in the paper include dynamic risk analysis, such as risk in price variations (models with stochastic mean and volatility), extreme risks (models with stochastic tails), risk on asset liquidity (stochastic volatility duration models), and moral hazard in insurance analysis. We propose estimation procedures for models with the marginal density of the series and factor dynamics parameterized by distinct subsets of parameters. Such a partitioning of the parameter vector found in many applications allows to simplify considerably statistical inference. We develop a two- stage Maximum Likelihood method, called the Finite Memory Maximum Likelihood, which is easy to implement in the presence of multiple factors. We also discuss simulation based estimation, testing, prediction and filtering.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.006 |
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 it