MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414521604 · doi:10.1111/mafi.70007

Risk Sharing, Measuring Variability, and Distortion Riskmetrics

2025· article· en· W4414521604 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Finance · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Portfolio Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPairwise comparisonDistortion (music)Class (philosophy)Monotone polygonPortfolioSet (abstract data type)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We address the problem of sharing risk among agents with preferences modeled by a general class of comonotonic additive and law‐invariant functionals that need not be either monotone or convex. Such functionals are called distortion riskmetrics, which include many statistical measures of risk and variability used in portfolio optimization and insurance. The set of Pareto‐optimal allocations is characterized under various settings of general or comonotonic risk sharing problems. We solve explicitly Pareto‐optimal allocations among agents using the Gini deviation, the mean–median deviation, or the interquantile difference (IQD) as the relevant variability measures. The latter is of particular interest, as optimal allocations are not comonotonic in the presence of IQD agents; instead, the optimal allocation features a mixture of pairwise counter‐monotonic structures, showing some patterns of extremal negative dependence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.650
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.286 · 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