Differential quantile-based sensitivity in discontinuous models
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
Differential sensitivity measures provide valuable tools for interpreting complex computational models, as used in applications ranging from simulation to algorithmic prediction. Taking the derivative of the model output in direction of a model parameter can reveal input–output relations and the relative importance of model parameters and input variables. Nonetheless, it is unclear how such derivatives should be taken when the model function has discontinuities and/or input variables are discrete. We present a general framework for addressing such problems, considering derivatives of quantile-based output risk measures, with respect to distortions to random input variables (risk factors), which impact the model output through step-functions. We prove that, subject to weak technical conditions, the derivatives are well-defined and we derive the corresponding formulas. We apply our results to the sensitivity analysis of compound risk models and to a numerical study of reinsurance credit risk in a multi-line insurance portfolio. • Local sensitivities calculated when input–output relation is discontinuous. • Quantile-based risk measures: Value-at-Risk, Expected Shortfall applied to output. • We introduce differential sensitivities to discrete inputs factors. • Sensitivity measures introduced are suitable for credit risk models. • Numerical case study on reinsurance credit default.
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 | 0.020 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it