Fuzzy portfolio optimization using conditional drawdown at risk: Empirical evidence on selective companies in the Tehran Stock Exchang
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article introduces an innovative fuzzy-based approach for developing a comprehensive portfolio optimization model that effectively accounts for inherent uncertainty while incorporating the investor's unique perspective on the dynamic stock market. The multi-objective optimization framework employs Conditional Drawdown at Risk to enhance investor flexibility in determining risk tolerance and optimal investment strategies tailored to specific needs. The research is notable for its pioneering use of intelligent methods to systematically collect valuable data from the Tehran Stock Exchange under fuzzy uncertainty. It incorporates important constraints such as cardinality and ceiling and floor limits for each investment period, allowing for a detailed analysis of various stock market scenarios and potential future outcomes. A case study is conducted with 25 diverse assets from the top five industry groups based on profit per share, from which five shares are thoughtfully selected to effectively demonstrate the model's unique effectiveness. The analysis rigorously assesses the model's performance in real-world conditions, highlighting the importance of accurately understanding the current stock market outlook and trends. To validate the model, the research compares results with a portfolio constructed under similar conditions of certainty and risk. The findings indicate that portfolios created under certainty yield significantly higher values, suggesting that successful portfolio construction is heavily influenced by the prevailing market conditions experienced by investors.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".