MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143299583 · doi:10.1080/14697680701213868

Portfolio optimization under the Value-at-Risk constraint

2007· article· en· W2143299583 on OpenAlexafffund
Traian A. Pirvu

Bibliographic record

VenueQuantitative Finance · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Portfolio Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPortfolio optimizationPortfolioConstraint (computer-aided design)Value at riskEconomicsValue (mathematics)Expected shortfallMathematical optimizationFinancial economicsEconometricsMathematical economicsActuarial scienceRisk managementMathematicsFinanceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we analyse the effects arising from imposing a Value-at-Risk constraint in an agent's portfolio selection problem. The financial market is incomplete and consists of multiple risky assets (stocks) plus a risk-free asset. The stocks are modelled as exponential Brownian motions with random drift and volatility. The risk of the trading portfolio is re-evaluated dynamically, hence the agent must satisfy the Value-at-Risk constraint continuously. We derive the optimal consumption and portfolio allocation policy in closed form for the case of logarithmic utility. The non-logarithmic CRRA utilities are considered as well, when the randomness of market coefficients is independent of the Brownian motion driving the stocks. The portfolio selection, a stochastic control problem, is reduced, in this context, to a deterministic control one, which is analysed, and a numerical treatment is proposed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations36
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuantitative FinanceSame topicRisk and Portfolio OptimizationFrench-language works237,207