MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197096319 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11658

Direct local linear estimation for Sharpe ratio function

2021· article· en· W3197096319 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hongmei Lin, Tiejun Tong, Yuedong Wang, Wenchao Xu, Riquan Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNatural Science Foundation of ShanghaiNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSharpe ratioEstimatorHeteroscedasticityNonparametric statisticsEconometricsMonte Carlo methodMathematicsStatisticsNonparametric regressionFunction (biology)EconomicsFinancePortfolio

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nonparametric regression has been widely used to deal with nonlinearity and heteroscedasticity in financial time series. As the ratio of the mean and standard deviation functions, the Sharpe ratio function is one of the most commonly used risk/return measures in financial econometrics. Most existing methods take an indirect procedure, which first estimates the mean and variance functions and then applies these two functions to estimate the Sharpe ratio function. In practice, however, such an indirect procedure can often be less efficient. In this article, we propose a direct method to estimate the Sharpe ratio function by local linear regression. We further establish the asymptotic normality of the proposed estimator, apply Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate its finite sample performance, and compare it with the indirect method. The usefulness of our new method is also illustrated through a real data 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)0.022
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207