The convergence of AI and portfolio optimization: A bibliometric exploration of research trends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rapid evolution of Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning (ML), and Deep Learning (DL) has profoundly influenced various domains, including portfolio optimization. In today’s dynamic and interconnected global economy, understanding the development of scientific publications in this field is crucial for both academics and practitioners. This paper aims to conduct a comprehensive bibliometric study of the scientific literature on portfolio optimization, focusing on the impact of AI, ML, and DL advancements. By analyzing key trends, influential publications, and emerging research areas, this study provides valuable insights into the progression of portfolio optimization research in the context of these transformative technologies, helping to map future directions and identify knowledge gaps in the field. This paper endeavors to present an exhaustive synthesis of the most recent advancements and innovations within the domain of portfolio optimization, particularly as influenced by progressive developments in AI, ML and DL from 1996 to 2024. Employing a rigorous bibliometric analysis, this study scrutinizes the structural and global paradigms governing this field. The analytical framework integrates several dimensions, including: (1) comprehensive dataset interrogation, (2) critical evaluation of source repositories, (3) contributions of seminal authors, (4) geographical and institutional affiliations, (5) document- centric analysis, and (6) exploration of keyword dynamics. A corpus of 745 bibliographic entries, meticulously curated from the Web of Science database, forms the basis of this inquiry, which utilizes advanced Scientometric network methodologies to extrapolate substantive research insights. The discourse culminates in a robust critique of the inherent strengths and methodological limitations, while delineating strategic avenues for future research, with the objective of steering ongoing scholarly discourse in the realm of portfolio optimization. The empirical outcomes of this study enhance the understanding of prevailing intellectual trajectories, thus laying a fortified foundation for future investigative pursuits in this critically evolving discipline.
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 | 0.017 | 0.089 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.123 | 0.228 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".