MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149754599 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2012.08.020

Measuring the risk of an Iranian banking system using Value at Risk (VaR) Model

2012· article· en· W2149754599 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sudabeh Morshedian Rafiee, Zahra Houshmand Neghabi, Ali Feizollahei

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInsurance and Financial Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValue (mathematics)Value at riskBusinessOperational riskRisk modelEconometricsActuarial scienceRisk managementRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceStatisticsEconomicsFinanceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measuring risk of financial institutes and banks plays an important role on managing them. Recent financial turmoil in United States banking system has motivated banking industry to monitor risk factors more closely. In this paper, we present an empirical study to measure the risk of some private banks in Iran called Bank Mellat using Value at Risk (VaR) method. The proposed study collects the necessary information for the fiscal year of 2010 and analyses them using regression analysis. The study divides the financial data into two groups where the financial data of the first half of year is considered in the first group and the remaining information for the second half of year 2010 is considered in the second group. The implementation of VaR method indicates that financial risks increase during the time horizon. The study also uses linear regression method where independent variable is time, dependent variable is the financial risk, and the results confirm what we have found in the previous part of the survey.

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)0.005
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.340
Threshold uncertainty score0.827

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicInsurance and Financial Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207