MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2502813864 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511807336.009

Investment and Diversification

2012· book-chapter· en· W2502813864 on OpenAlexaff
Narat Charupat, Huaxiong Huang, Moshe A. Milevsky

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Reporting and Valuation Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversification (marketing strategy)BusinessInvestment (military)EconomicsPolitical scienceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Learning Objectives People invest their savings in order to attain some specific objectives. The objectives can be short term (such as for education or for a down payment on a house) or long term (such as for retirement). The goal of an investment decision is to choose a portfolio that is optimal for the investor's objective and risk preference. In this chapter and the next, you will learn about investment decisions – how you should invest your savings and what factors you have to take into consideration when making an investment decision. Because investment is now a very large topic, it is not possible to cover every aspect of it in detail in this book. We concentrate on the most important issues and also on how investment decisions are related to the concept of consumption smoothing. This chapter discusses the basic principles of investment. It starts by identifying the investment choices that are available to you. We classify these choices into five categories (or asset classes), and examine the risk and return of each asset class. Finally, you learn the concept of asset allocation and diversification. Investment Decisions and Consumption Saving and investing for retirement is what most people have to do. Recall from Chapter 4 that under the consumption-smoothing framework, you choose a consumption pattern that maximizes your total standard of living over your lifetime. One factor that determines the pattern of your optimal discretionary consumption is the rate of return that you can get on your savings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.164 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicFinancial Reporting and Valuation ResearchFrench-language works237,207