MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2471591028 · doi:10.21314/jcr.2007.058

Affine Markov chain model of multifirm credit migration

2007· article· en· W2471591028 on OpenAlexaff
T. R. Hurd, Alexey Kuznetsov

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Credit Risk · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCredit Risk and Financial Regulations
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollateralized debt obligationAffine transformationMarkov chainComputer scienceCredit derivativeInterest rateCredit riskEconometricsEconomicsMathematicsActuarial scienceFinanceMachine learningCollateral

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This paper introduces and explores variations on a natural extension of the intensity-based doubly stochastic framework for credit default. The essential addition proposed here is to introduce a Markov chain for the “credit rating” of each firm, which is independent conditioned on a stochastic time change, or equivalently a stochastic intensity. The stochastic time change is then combined with other stochastic factors, here the interest rate and the recovery rate, into a multidimensional affine process. The resulting general framework has the computational effectiveness of the intensity-based models. This paper aims to illustrate the potential of the general framework by exploring a minimal implementation which is still capable of combining stochastic interest rates, stochastic recovery rates and the multifirm default process. Already within this minimal version we see very good reproduction of essential features of credit spread curves, default correlations and multifirm default distributions. Increased flexibility can also be achieved with a number of mathematical extensions of the basic framework. In a companion paper (Hurd and Kuznetsov, 2006) we show how the same framework extends to large-scale basket credit derivatives, particularly CDOs (collateralized debt obligations).

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.249
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations39
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Credit RiskSame topicCredit Risk and Financial RegulationsFrench-language works237,207