MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411535800 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18070347

Risk-Sensitive Deep Reinforcement Learning for Portfolio Optimization

2025· article· en· W4411535800 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xinyao Wang, Lili Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational University of Singapore
KeywordsReinforcement learningSharpe ratioFutures contractVolatility (finance)Portfolio optimizationPortfolioAsset allocationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceEconomicsFinancial economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Navigating the complexity of petroleum futures markets—marked by extreme volatility, geopolitical uncertainty, and macroeconomic shocks—demands adaptive and risk-sensitive strategies. This paper explores an Adaptive Risk-sensitive Transformer-based Deep Reinforcement Learning (ART-DRL) framework to improve portfolio optimization in commodity futures trading. While deep reinforcement learning (DRL) has been applied in equities and forex, its use in commodities remains underexplored. We evaluate DRL models, including Deep Q-Networks (DQN), Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO), Advantage Actor-Critic (A2C), and Deep Deterministic Policy Gradient (DDPG), integrating dynamic reward functions and asset-specific optimization. Empirical results show improvements in risk-adjusted performance, with an annualized return of 1.353, a Sharpe Ratio of 4.340, and a Sortino Ratio of 57.766. Although the return is below DQN (1.476), the proposed model achieves better stability and risk control. Notably, the models demonstrate resilience by learning from historical periods of extreme volatility, including the COVID-19 pandemic (2020–2021) and geopolitical shocks such as the Russia–Ukraine conflict (2022), despite testing commencing in January 2023. This research offers a practical, data-driven framework for risk-sensitive decision-making in commodities, showing how machine learning can support portfolio management under volatile market conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.198 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207