MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2585021503 · doi:10.1515/strm-2015-0028

Improved algorithms for computing worst Value-at-Risk

2017· article· en· W2585021503 on OpenAlex
Marius Hofert, Amir Memartoluie, David Saunders, Tony S. Wirjanto

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics & Risk Modeling · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Portfolio Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsHomogeneousContext (archaeology)AlgorithmMatrix (chemical analysis)Value (mathematics)Mathematical optimizationCombinatoricsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Numerical challenges inherent in algorithms for computing worst Value-at-Risk in homogeneous portfolios are identified and solutions as well as words of warning concerning their implementation are provided. Furthermore, both conceptual and computational improvements to the Rearrangement Algorithm for approximating worst Value-at-Risk for portfolios with arbitrary marginal loss distributions are given. In particular, a novel Adaptive Rearrangement Algorithm is introduced and investigated. These algorithms are implemented using the R package qrmtools and may be of interest in any context in which it is required to find columnwise permutations of a matrix such that the minimal (maximal) row sum is maximized (minimized).

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)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.411
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.302 · 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