MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2276376831 · doi:10.1515/demo-2015-0009

Seven Proofs for the Subadditivity ofExpected Shortfall

2015· article· en· W2276376831 on OpenAlexafffund
Paul Embrechts, Ruodu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueDependence Modeling · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Portfolio Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEidgenössische Technische Hochschule ZürichSwiss Finance Institute
KeywordsSubadditivityMathematical proofEstimatorMathematicsConsistency (knowledge bases)Mathematical economicsCalculus (dental)Discrete mathematicsStatisticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Subadditivity is the key property which distinguishes the popular risk measures Value-at-Risk and Expected Shortfall (ES). In this paper we offer seven proofs of the subadditivity of ES, some found in the literature and some not. One of the main objectives of this paper is to provide a general guideline for instructors to teach the subadditivity of ES in a course. We discuss the merits and suggest appropriate contexts for each proof.With different proofs, different important properties of ES are revealed, such as its dual representation, optimization properties, continuity, consistency with convex order, and natural estimators.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.090
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.090
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.006
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.011
Open science0.0040.011
Research integrity0.0030.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.002

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 head0.327
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.089 · 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

Citations49
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDependence ModelingSame topicRisk and Portfolio OptimizationFrench-language works237,207