MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3172927245 · doi:10.3390/risks9060108

Merton investment problems in finance and insurance for the Hawkes-Based models

2021· article· en· W3172927245 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

VenueEconstor (Econstor) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicPoint processes and geometric inequalities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHamilton–Jacobi–Bellman equationPortfolioActuarial scienceInvestment (military)ReinsuranceEconomicsStochastic controlBondMathematical economicsFinanceBellman equationEconometricsFinancial economicsMathematicsMathematical optimizationOptimal control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We show how to solve Merton optimal investment stochastic control problem for Hawkesbased models in finance and insurance (Propositions 1 and 2), i.e., for a wealth portfolio X(t) consisting of a bond and a stock price described by general compound Hawkes process (GCHP), and for a capital R(t) (risk process) of an insurance company with the amount of claims described by the risk model based on GCHP. The main approach in both cases is to use functional central limit theorem for the GCHP to approximate it with a diffusion process. Then we construct and solve Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman (HJB) equation for the expected utility function. The novelty of the results consists of the new Hawkes-based models and in the new optimal investment results in finance and insurance for those models.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.801

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.223 · 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