MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082820511 · doi:10.1155/2010/596839

Estimating the Conditional Tail Expectation in the Case of Heavy‐Tailed Losses

2010· article· en· W2082820511 on OpenAlexafffund
Abdelhakim Necir, Abdelaziz Rassoul, Ričardas Zitikis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Probability and Statistics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSociety of Actuaries
KeywordsMathematicsEstimatorNonparametric statisticsMoment (physics)NormalityApplied mathematicsEconometricsAsymptotic distributionMeasure (data warehouse)Extreme value theoryConditional expectationVariable (mathematics)Expected shortfallStatisticsMathematical analysisEconomicsRisk managementComputer scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The conditional tail expectation (CTE) is an important actuarial risk measure and a useful tool in financial risk assessment. Under the classical assumption that the second moment of the loss variable is finite, the asymptotic normality of the nonparametric CTE estimator has already been established in the literature. The noted result, however, is not applicable when the loss variable follows any distribution with infinite second moment, which is a frequent situation in practice. With a help of extreme‐value methodology, in this paper, we offer a solution to the problem by suggesting a new CTE estimator, which is applicable when losses have finite means but infinite variances.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
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

Citations57
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Probability and StatisticsSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207