MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952769495 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1506.05866

An Efficient Optimization Approach for a Cardinality-Constrained Index Tracking Problem

2015· preprint· en· W2952769495 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Fengmin Xu, Zhaosong Lu, Zongben Xu

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCardinality (data modeling)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceTracking errorTracking (education)PortfolioConsistency (knowledge bases)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the practical business environment, portfolio managers often face business-driven requirements that limit the number of constituents in their tracking portfolio. A natural index tracking model is thus to minimize a tracking error measure while enforcing an upper bound on the number of assets in the portfolio. In this paper we consider such a cardinality-constrained index tracking model. In particular, we propose an efficient nonmonotone projected gradient (NPG) method for solving this problem. At each iteration, this method usually solves several projected gradient subproblems. We show that each subproblem has a closed-form solution, which can be computed in linear time. Under some suitable assumptions, we establish that any accumulation point of the sequence generated by the NPG method is a local minimizer of the cardinality-constrained index tracking problem. We also conduct empirical tests to compare our method with the hybrid evolutionary algorithm and the hybrid half thresholding algorithm \cite{L1/2} for index tracking. The computational results demonstrate that our approach generally produces sparse portfolios with smaller out-of-sample tracking error and higher consistency between in-sample and out-of-sample tracking errors. Moreover, our method outperforms the other two approaches in terms of speed.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.119 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207