Maximum Spectral Measures of Risk with Given Risk Factor Marginal Distributions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the problem of determining an upper bound for the value of a spectral risk measure of a loss that is a general nonlinear function of two factors whose marginal distributions are known but whose joint distribution is unknown. The factors may take values in complete separable metric spaces. We introduce the notion of Maximum Spectral Measure (MSM), as a worst-case spectral risk measure of the loss with respect to the dependence between the factors. The MSM admits a formulation as a solution to an optimization problem that has the same constraint set as the optimal transport problem but with a more general objective function. We present results analogous to the Kantorovich duality, and we investigate the continuity properties of the optimal value function and optimal solution set with respect to perturbation of the marginal distributions. Additionally, we provide an asymptotic result characterizing the limiting distribution of the optimal value function when the factor distributions are simulated from finite sample spaces. The special case of Expected Shortfall and the resulting Maximum Expected Shortfall is also examined. Funding: M. Ghossoub and D. Saunders acknowledge financial support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada in the form of Discovery Grants [Grants 2018-03961 and 2017-04220, respectively].
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".