MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910908669 · doi:10.1111/mafi.12211

An efficient approach to quantile capital allocation and sensitivity analysis

2019· article· en· W2910908669 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexandru V. Asimit, Liang Peng, Ruodu Wang, Alex Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Finance · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Portfolio Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSimons Foundation
KeywordsQuantileEstimatorNonparametric statisticsValue at riskEconometricsCapital allocation lineExpected shortfallRandom variableMathematicsQuantile functionStatisticsEconomicsRisk managementFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In various fields of applications such as capital allocation, sensitivity analysis, and systemic risk evaluation, one often needs to compute or estimate the expectation of a random variable, given that another random variable is equal to its quantile at some prespecified probability level. A primary example of such an application is the Euler capital allocation formula for the quantile (often called the value‐at‐risk), which is of crucial importance in financial risk management. It is well known that classic nonparametric estimation for the above quantile allocation problem has a slower rate of convergence than the standard rate. In this paper, we propose an alternative approach to the quantile allocation problem via adjusting the probability level in connection with an expected shortfall. The asymptotic distribution of the proposed nonparametric estimator of the new capital allocation is derived for dependent data under the setup of a mixing sequence. In order to assess the performance of the proposed nonparametric estimator, AR‐GARCH models are proposed to fit each risk variable, and further, a bootstrap method based on residuals is employed to quantify the estimation uncertainty. A simulation study is conducted to examine the finite sample performance of the proposed inference. Finally, the proposed methodology of quantile capital allocation is illustrated for a financial data set.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.297 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations40
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical FinanceSame topicRisk and Portfolio OptimizationFrench-language works237,207