MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2975643303

An Extension of the Consumption-based CAPM Model

2012· article· en· W2975643303 on OpenAlexaff
Georges Dionne, Jingyuan Li, Cédric Okou

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - Lingnan (Lingnan University) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapital asset pricing modelPrudenceEquity premium puzzleEconometricsEconomicsRisk premiumCovarianceRisk aversion (psychology)Consumption (sociology)Degree (music)Financial economicsMathematicsExpected utility hypothesisStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We extend the Consumption-based CAPM (C-CAPM) model to representative agents with different risk attitudes. We first use the concept of expectation dependence and show that for a risk averse representative agent, it is the first-degree expectation dependence (FED) rather than the covariance that determines C-CAPM’s riskiness. We extend the assumption of risk aversion to prudence and propose the measure of second-degree expectation dependence (SED) to obtain the values of asset price and equity premium. These theoretical results are linked to the equity premium puzzle. Using the same dataset as in Campbell (2003), the estimated measures of relative risk aversion from FED and SED approximations are much lower than those obtained in the original study and correspond to the theoretical values often discussed in the literature. The theoretical model is then generalized to higher-degree risk changes and higher-order risk averse representative agents.

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)0.004
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.152 · 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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Commons - Lingnan (Lingnan University)Same topicFinancial Markets and Investment StrategiesFrench-language works237,207