MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379618761 · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2023.06.003

Risk budgeting portfolios from simulations

2023· article· en· W4379618761 on OpenAlexafffund
Bernardo Freitas Paulo da Costa, Silvana M. Pesenti, Rodrigo S. Targino

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Operational Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Portfolio Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de JaneiroConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsPortfolioComputer scienceStochastic gradient descentPortfolio optimizationAsset (computer security)EconometricsExpected shortfallDistortion (music)Project portfolio managementAsset allocationMathematical optimizationFinanceEconomicsMathematicsMachine learningProject management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Risk budgeting is a portfolio strategy where each asset contributes a prespecified amount to the aggregate risk of the portfolio. In this work, we propose an efficient numerical framework that uses only simulations of returns for estimating risk budgeting portfolios. Besides a general cutting planes algorithm for determining the weights of risk budgeting portfolios for arbitrary coherent distortion risk measures, we provide a specialised version for the Expected Shortfall, and a tailored Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) algorithm, also for the Expected Shortfall. We compare our algorithm to standard convex optimisation solvers and illustrate different risk budgeting portfolios, constructed using an especially designed Julia package, on real financial data and compare it to classical portfolio strategies.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.257
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Operational ResearchSame topicRisk and Portfolio OptimizationFrench-language works237,207