MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3171612222 · doi:10.1007/s11579-022-00313-9

Law-Invariant Functionals that Collapse to the Mean: Beyond Convexity

2022· article· en· W3171612222 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Felix-Benedikt Liebrich, Cosimo Munari

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics and Financial Economics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Portfolio Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversität BielefeldUniversity of WaterlooGottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Universität Hannover
KeywordsQuasiconvex functionMathematical financeConvexityInvariant (physics)QuantileMathematicsRegular polygonMathematical economicsApplied mathematicsConvex analysisEconometricsEconomicsFinanceConvex optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We establish general “collapse to the mean” principles that provide conditions under which a law-invariant functional reduces to an expectation. In the convex setting, we retrieve and sharpen known results from the literature. However, our results also apply beyond the convex setting. We illustrate this by providing a complete account of the “collapse to the mean” for quasiconvex functionals. In the special cases of consistent risk measures and Choquet integrals, we can even dispense with quasiconvexity. In addition, we relate the “collapse to the mean” to the study of solutions of a broad class of optimisation problems with law-invariant objectives that appear in mathematical finance, insurance, and economics. We show that the corresponding quantile formulations studied in the literature are sometimes illegitimate and require further analysis.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematics and Financial EconomicsSame topicRisk and Portfolio OptimizationFrench-language works237,207