Optimal Asset Allocation For Outperforming A Stochastic Benchmark Target
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a data-driven Neural Network (NN) optimization framework to determine the optimal multi-period dynamic asset allocation strategy for outperforming a general stochastic target. We formulate the problem as an optimal stochastic control with an asymmetric, distribution shaping, objective function. The proposed framework is illustrated with the asset allocation problem in the accumulation phase of a defined contribution pension plan, with the goal of achieving a higher terminal wealth than a stochastic benchmark. We demonstrate that the data-driven approach is capable of learning an adaptive asset allocation strategy directly from historical market returns, without assuming any parametric model of the financial market dynamics. Following the optimal adaptive strategy, investors can make allocation decisions simply depending on the current state of the portfolio. The optimal adaptive strategy outperforms the benchmark constant proportion strategy, achieving a higher terminal wealth with a 90% probability, a 46% higher median terminal wealth, and a significantly more right-skewed terminal wealth distribution. We further demonstrate the robustness of the optimal adaptive strategy by testing the performance of the strategy on bootstrap resampled market data, which has different distributions compared to the training data.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".