MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123979795 · doi:10.1093/jjfinec/nbh004

Backtesting Value-at-Risk: A Duration-Based Approach

2004· article· en· W3123979795 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Financial Econometrics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCredit Risk and Financial Regulations
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCenter for Interuniversity Research and Analysis on Organizations
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDuration (music)Monte Carlo methodEconometricsValue (mathematics)Sample (material)Market riskKey (lock)Risk managementComputer scienceEconomicsStatisticsMathematicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Financial risk model evaluation or backtesting is a key part of the internal model's approach to market risk management as laid out by the Basle Committee on Banking Supervision. However, existing backtesting methods have relatively low power in realistic small sample settings. Our contribution is the exploration of new tools for backtesting based on the duration of days between the violations of the Value-at-Risk. Our Monte Carlo results show that in realistic situations, the new duration-based tests have considerably better power properties than the previously suggested tests.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.177 · 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