MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2501681817 · doi:10.3390/risks6010023

Desirable Portfolios in Fixed Income Markets: Application to Credit Risk Premiums

2018· article· en· W2501681817 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueRisks · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Portfolio Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFixed incomePortfolioCash flowReplicating portfolioArbitrageBondPortfolio optimizationEconomicsFinancial economicsEconometricsBusinessActuarial scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An arbitrage portfolio provides a cash flow that can never be negative at zero cost. We define the weaker concept of a “desirable portfolio” delivering cash flows with negative risk at zero cost. Although these are not completely risk-free investments and subject to the risk measure used, they can provide attractive investment opportunities for investors. We investigate in detail the theoretical aspects of this portfolio selection procedure and the existence of such opportunities in fixed income markets. Then, we present two applications of the theory: one in analyzing market integration problem and the other in gauging the credit quality of defaultable bonds in a portfolio. We also discuss the model calibration and provide some numerical illustrations.

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.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.321 · 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