MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2228987094

AN IMPROVED IMPLIED COPULA MODEL AND ITS APPLICATION TO THE VALUATION OF BESPOKE CDO TRANCHES

2009· article· en· W2228987094 on OpenAlexaff
John Hull, Alan White, Joseph L. Rotman

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCredit Risk and Financial Regulations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrancheCopula (linguistics)Collateralized debt obligationBespokeEconometricsValuation (finance)EconomicsGaussianActuarial scienceComputer scienceBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Hull and White (2006) we showed how CDO quotes can be used to imply a probability distribution for the hazard rate over the life of the CDO. This is known as the “implied copula approach. ” In this paper we develop a parametric version of the implied copula approach and show how it can be used for valuing bespoke CDOs. Both homogeneous and heterogeneous versions of the model are presented and the differences between the results obtained from the two versions of the model are examined. Results are also presented for the situation where the model is extended so that hazard rates are driven by more than one factor.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 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

Citations22
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicCredit Risk and Financial RegulationsFrench-language works237,207