MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138206455 · doi:10.3390/jrfm14050202

Large Deviations for a Class of Multivariate Heavy-Tailed Risk Processes Used in Insurance and Finance

2021· article· en· W3138206455 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Miriam Hägele, Jaakko Lehtomaa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultivariate statisticsPortfolioWeibull distributionMathematicsEconometricsClass (philosophy)Multivariate random variableHeavy-tailed distributionType (biology)Constraint (computer-aided design)Parametric statisticsEconomicsRandom variableFinanceStatisticsComputer scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern risk modelling approaches deal with vectors of multiple components. The components could be, for example, returns of financial instruments or losses within an insurance portfolio concerning different lines of business. One of the main problems is to decide if there is any type of dependence between the components of the vector and, if so, what type of dependence structure should be used for accurate modelling. We study a class of heavy-tailed multivariate random vectors under a non-parametric shape constraint on the tail decay rate. This class contains, for instance, elliptical distributions whose tail is in the intermediate heavy-tailed regime, which includes Weibull and lognormal type tails. The study derives asymptotic approximations for tail events of random walks. Consequently, a full large deviations principle is obtained under, essentially, minimal assumptions. As an application, an optimisation method for a large class of Quota Share (QS) risk sharing schemes used in insurance and finance is obtained.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.207
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207