The End of Mean-Variance? Tsallis Entropy Revolutionises Portfolio Optimisation in Cryptocurrencies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Has the mean-variance framework become obsolete? In this paper, we replace traditional variance–covariance methods of portfolio optimisation with relative Tsallis entropy and mutual information measures. Its goal is to enhance risk management and diversification in complicated finance ecosystems. We utilize the S&P 500 and Bitwise 10 cryptocurrency indices’ daily returns (2019–2024 data) and conduct our analysis to the year 2020 under extreme shocks. Many models were trained with different configurations, like mean-variance (MV), mean-entropy (ME), and mean-mutual information (MI) traders and their corresponding variants, using Sharpe’s ratio, Jensen’s alpha, and entropy value of risk (EVAR). The findings indicate that entropic models outperform conventional models in terms of diversification and, especially, extreme risk management. Because the appropriate normalization conditions often fail to be satisfied, we can informally see that after a recalibration of the effective frontier, we obtain from EVAR an accumulated resilience aspect to these rare events while also observing the great potential of entropy-based models to replicate non-linear dependencies between assets. The results show that models combining entropy and mutual information optimise the gain–loss ratio (GLR), providing stable diversification and improved risk management, while maximising returns in complex and volatile market environments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".