Adaptive Conformal Inference for Computing Market Risk Measures: An Analysis with Four Thousand Crypto-Assets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the estimation of the value at risk (VaR) across various probability levels for the log-returns of a comprehensive dataset comprising four thousand crypto-assets. Employing four recently introduced adaptive conformal inference (ACI) algorithms, we aim to provide robust uncertainty estimates crucial for effective risk management in financial markets. We contrast the performance of these ACI algorithms with that of traditional benchmark models, including GARCH models and daily range models. Despite the substantial volatility observed in the majority of crypto-assets, our findings indicate that ACI algorithms exhibit notable efficacy. In contrast, daily range models, and to a lesser extent, GARCH models, encounter challenges related to numerical convergence issues and structural breaks. Among the ACI algorithms, Fully Adaptive Conformal Inference (FACI) and Scale-Free Online Gradient Descent (SF-OGD) stand out for their ability to provide precise VaR estimates across all quantiles examined. Conversely, Aggregated Adaptive Conformal Inference (AgACI) and Strongly Adaptive Online Conformal Prediction (SAOCP) demonstrate proficiency in estimating VaR for extreme quantiles but tend to be overly conservative for higher probability levels. These conclusions withstand robustness checks encompassing the market capitalization of crypto-assets, time-series size, and different forecasting methods for asset log-returns. This study underscores the promise of ACI algorithms in enhancing risk assessment practices in the context of volatile and dynamic crypto-asset markets.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".