MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067516990 · doi:10.2143/ast.39.1.2038062

Estimating the Variance of Bootstrapped Risk Measures

2009· article· en· W2067516990 on OpenAlexafffund
Joseph H.T. Kim, Mary R. Hardy

Bibliographic record

VenueAstin Bulletin · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Portfolio Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsQuantileEstimatorMathematicsMeasure (data warehouse)ResamplingVariance (accounting)StatisticsEconometricsExpected shortfallRisk measureComputer scienceRisk managementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In Kim and Hardy (2007) the exact bootstrap was used to estimate certain risk measures including Value at Risk and the Conditional Tail Expectation. In this paper we continue this work by deriving the influence function of the exact-bootstrapped quantile risk measure. We can use the influence function to estimate the variance of the exact-bootstrap risk measure. We then extend the result to the L-estimator class, which includes the conditional tail expectation risk measure. The resulting formula provides an alternative way to estimate the variance of the bootstrapped risk measures, or the whole L-estimator class in an analytic form. A simulation study shows that this new method is comparable to the ordinary resampling-based bootstrap method, with the advantages of an analytic approach.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstin BulletinSame topicRisk and Portfolio OptimizationFrench-language works237,207