Algorithmic design of a conditional value-at-risk optimization model based on implied volatility for multi-period portfolio adjustment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on the definition of volatility and conditional value risk (CVaR), this paper introduces the implied volatility into CVaR model, and further analyzes the partial differential equation of stock portfolio optimization in the form of BS model. In the process of multi-stage investment, in order to reasonably control the investment risk of each stage, the CvaR model based on implied volatility is constructed by using the scenario tree method. With the data of 1166 trading days as the data, 4 stock assets as the data set of this study, the optimization model is applied to the calculation and analysis. The numerical simulation shows that the stock price fluctuation of the four multi-cycle stocks ranges from -23.45% to 41.97%, showing a clustering phenomenon. Among them, the volatility of stocks A and C is more obvious than that of stocks B and D, and the probability density tails of stocks are longer in the cycle, and they all show thick tail characteristics, indicating that the introduction of implied volatility of CVaR model makes the risk control of actual equity asset investment more reasonable.
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".