Stress Testing and Systemic Risk Measures Using Elliptical Conditional Multivariate Probabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Systemic risk, in a complex system with several interrelated variables, such as a financial market, is quantifiable from the multivariate probability distribution describing the reciprocal influence between the system’s variables. The effect of stress on the system is reflected by the change in such a multivariate probability distribution, conditioned to some of the variables being at a given stress’ amplitude. Therefore, the knowledge of the conditional probability distribution function can provide a full quantification of risk and stress propagation in the system. However, multivariate probabilities are hard to estimate from observations. In this paper, I investigate the vast family of multivariate elliptical distributions, discussing their estimation from data and proposing novel measures for stress impact and systemic risk in systems with many interrelated variables. Specific examples are described for the multivariate Student-t and the multivariate normal distributions applied to financial stress testing. An example of the US equity market illustrates the practical potentials of this approach.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".