GROWTH VERSUS SECURITY IN DYNAMIC INVESTMENT ANALYSIS
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper concerns the problem of optimal dynamic choice in discrete time for an Investor. In each period the investor is faced with one or more risky investments. The maximization of the expected logarithm of the period by period wealth, referred to as the Kelly criterion, is a very desirable investment procedure. It has many attractive properties, such as maximizing the asymptotic rate of growth of the investor’s fortune. On the other hand, instead of focusing on maximal growth, one can develop strategies based on maximum security. For example, one can minimize the ruin probability subject to making a positive return or compute a confidence level of increasing the investor’s initial fortune to a given final wealth goal. This paper is concerned with methods to combine these two approaches. We derive computational formulas for a variety of growth and security measures. Utilizing fractional Kelly strategies, we can develop a complete tradeoff of growth versus security. The theory is applicable to favorable investment situations such as blackjack, horseracing, lotto games, index and commodity futures and options trading. The results provide insight into how one should properly invest in these situations.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it