MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3100508412 · doi:10.1080/00207179.2020.1849807

Dynamic asset-liability management problem in a continuous-time model with delay

2020· article· en· W3100508412 on OpenAlexfundno aff
A Chunxiang, Yang Shen, Yan Zeng

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Control · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong ProvinceMinistry of Education of the People's Republic of ChinaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNatural Science Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAsset (computer security)Bellman equationLiabilityVariance (accounting)Investment strategyStochastic differential equationEconomicsStochastic controlInvestment (military)Mathematical optimizationMathematical economicsComputer scienceMathematicsMicroeconomicsOptimal controlApplied mathematicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates a dynamic continuous-time asset-liability management (ALM) problem with delay under the mean-variance criterion. The investor allocates her wealth in a financial market consisting of one risk-free asset and one risky asset, and she is subject to a random liability. The historical information of the wealth and liability affects the investor's wealth process, which is then governed by a stochastic differential delay equation. Firstly, a general ALM problem with delay is formulated and the extended Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman system of equations is obtained. Secondly, we focus on a linear model and derive the closed-form expressions of the equilibrium investment strategy and the corresponding equilibrium value function. Meanwhile, we also derive the pre-commitment strategy for the mean-variance ALM problem with delay using the maximum principle. Finally, some numerical examples and sensitivity analysis are presented to illustrate the equilibrium investment strategies and the efficient frontiers under the equilibrium and pre-commitment frameworks.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 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

Citations33
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of ControlSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207