Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper studies risk premia in the foreign exchange market when investors entertain multiple models for consumption growth. Investors confront two sources of uncertainty: (1) individual models might be misspecified, and (2) it is not known which of these potentially misspecified models is the best approximation to the actual data-generating process. Following Hansen and Sargent (Hansen, L. P., and T. J. Sargent. 2010. “Fragile Beliefs and the Price of Uncertainty.” Quantitative Economics 1 (1): 129–162.), agents formulate “robust” portfolio policies. These policies are implemented by applying two risk-sensitivity operators. One is forward-looking, and pessimistically distorts the state dynamics of each individual model. The other is backward-looking, and pessimistically distorts the probability weights assigned to each model. A robust learner assigns higher weights to worst-case models that yield lower continuation values. The magnitude of this distortion evolves over time in response to realized consumption growth. It is shown that robust learning not only explains unconditional risk premia in the foreign exchange market, it can also explain the dynamics of risk premia. In particular, an empirically plausible concern for model misspecification and model uncertainty generates a stochastic discount factor that uniformly satisfies the spectral Hansen-Jagannathan bound of Otrok et al. (Otrok, C., B. Ravikumar, and C. H. Whiteman. 2007. “A Generalized Volatility Bound for Dynamic Economies.” Journal of Monetary Economics 54 (8): 2269–2290.).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".