MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323804483 · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-30710-z

Quantum computing reduces systemic risk in financial networks

2023· article· en· W4323804483 on OpenAlexafffund
Amine Mohamed Aboussalah, Cheng Chi, Chi-Guhn Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSystemic riskComputer scienceCascading failureScalabilityContext (archaeology)Convergence (economics)QuantumCascadeFinancial institutionMathematical optimizationAlgorithmFinanceFinancial crisisMathematicsBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In highly connected financial networks, the failure of a single institution can cascade into additional bank failures. This systemic risk can be mitigated by adjusting the loans, holding shares, and other liabilities connecting institutions in a way that prevents cascading of failures. We are approaching the systemic risk problem by attempting to optimize the connections between the institutions. In order to provide a more realistic simulation environment, we have incorporated nonlinear/discontinuous losses in the value of the banks. To address scalability challenges, we have developed a two-stage algorithm where the networks are partitioned into modules of highly interconnected banks and then the modules are individually optimized. We developed a new algorithms for classical and quantum partitioning for directed and weighed graphs (first stage) and a new methodology for solving Mixed Integer Linear Programming problems with constraints for the systemic risk context (second stage). We compare classical and quantum algorithms for the partitioning problem. Experimental results demonstrate that our two-stage optimization with quantum partitioning is more resilient to financial shocks, delays the cascade failure phase transition, and reduces the total number of failures at convergence under systemic risks with reduced time complexity.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207