MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415357618 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18100591

Using Markov Chains and Entropy to Explain Value at Risk in European Electricity Markets

2025· article· en· W4415357618 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Oscar Walduin Orozco-Cerón, Orlando Joaqui-Barandica, Diego Fernando Manotas Duque

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolatility (finance)ElectricityDiversification (marketing strategy)Value at riskMarkov chainFinancial marketEntropy (arrow of time)Systemic riskBrent CrudePanel data

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing complexity of energy systems amid the global push for decarbonization raises important questions about how transitions in the energy matrix affect financial risk in electricity markets. This study investigates the relationship between structural changes in national energy matrices and the systemic risk associated with electricity prices in Europe from 2015 to 2022. Using daily electricity price data, we calculate log returns and estimate the Value at Risk (VaR) at the 1% level as a measure of extreme financial loss. We incorporate energy market variables, including the volatility of Brent oil and coal prices, and an entropy-based indicator derived from the Shannon index, which captures the degree of technological dispersion in the energy mix over time. A fixed-effects panel regression model is applied across 21 European countries to identify the drivers of energy-related financial risk. Results show that higher volatility in Brent and coal prices significantly increases the VaR, and that greater entropy reflecting a more complex and dynamic energy transition also correlates with higher systemic risk. These findings suggest that while energy diversification is a goal of sustainability, it may entail short-term instability. The study contributes to the understanding of how structural transformations in energy systems interact with financial vulnerabilities in liberalized electricity markets.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207