Inequality Aversion and Performance in and on the Field

The experimental literature and studies using survey data have established that people care a great deal about their relative economic position and not solely, as standard economic theory assumes, about their absolute economic position. Individuals are concerned about social comparisons. However, behavioral evidence in the field is rare. This paper provides an empirical analysis, testing the model of inequality aversion using two unique panel data sets for basketball and soccer players. We find support that the concept of inequality aversion helps to understand how the relative income situation affects performance in a real competitive environment with real tasks and real incentives.

Conditional coskewness and asset pricing

We explore the empirical usefulness of conditional coskewness to explain the cross-section of equity returns. We find that coskewness is an important determinant of the returns to equity, and that the pricing relationship varies through time. In particular we find that when the conditional market skewness is positive investors are willing to sacrifice 7.87% annually per unit of gamma (a standardized measure of coskewness risk) while they only demand a premium of 1.80% when the market is negatively skewed. A similar picture emerges from the coskewness factor of Harvey and Siddique (Harvey, C., Siddique, A., 2000a. Conditional skewness in asset pricing models tests. Journal of Finance 65, 1263–1295.) (a portfolio that is long stocks with small coskewness with the market and short high coskewness stocks) which earns 5.00% annually when the market is positively skewed but only 2.81% when the market is negatively skewed. The conditional two-moment CAPM and a conditional Fama and French (Fama, E., French, K., 1992. The cross-section of expected returns. Journal of Finance 47,427465.) three-factor model are rejected, but a model which includes coskewness is not rejected by the data. The model also passes a structural break test which many existing asset pricing models fail.

Limited information estimation and evaluation of DSGE models

We advance the proposition that dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) models should not only be estimated and evaluated with full information methods. These require that the complete system of equations be specified properly. Some limited information analysis, which focuses upon specific equations, is therefore likely to be a useful complement to full system analysis. Two major problems occur when implementing limited information methods. These are the presence of forward-looking expectations in the system as well as unobservable non-stationary variables. We present methods for dealing with both of these difficulties, and illustrate the interaction between full and limited information methods using a well-known model.

Seeing the Wood for the Trees: A Critical Evaluation of Methods to Estimate the Parameters of Stochastic Differential Equations

Maximum-likelihood estimates of the parameters of stochastic differential equations are consistent and asymptotically efficient, but unfortunately difficult to obtain if a closed-form expression for the transitional probability density function of the process is not available. As a result, a large number of competing estimation procedures have been proposed. This article provides a critical evaluation of the various estimation techniques. Special attention is given to the ease of implementation and comparative performance of the procedures when estimating the parameters of the Cox–Ingersoll–Ross and Ornstein–Uhlenbeck equations respectively.

Diversification and value-at-risk

A pervasive and puzzling feature of banks’ Value-at-Risk (VaR) is its abnormally high level, which leads to excessive regulatory capital. A possible explanation for the tendency of commercial banks to overstate their VaR is that they incompletely account for the diversification effect among broad risk categories (e.g., equity, interest rate, commodity, credit spread, and foreign exchange). By underestimating the diversification effect, bank’s proprietary VaR models produce overly prudent market risk assessments. In this paper, we examine empirically the validity of this hypothesis using actual VaR data from major US commercial banks. In contrast to the VaR diversification hypothesis, we find that US banks show no sign of systematic underestimation of the diversification effect. In particular, diversification effects used by banks is very close to (and quite often larger than) our empirical diversification estimates. A direct implication of this finding is that individual VaRs for each broad risk category, just like aggregate VaRs, are biased risk assessments.

Convexity, Classification, and Risk Bounds

Many of the classification algorithms developed in the machine learning literature, including the support vector machine and boosting, can be viewed as minimum contrast methods that minimize a convex surrogate of the 0–1 loss function. The convexity makes these algorithms computationally efficient. The use of a surrogate, however, has statistical consequences that must be balanced against the computational virtues of convexity. To study these issues, we provide a general quantitative relationship between the risk as assessed using the 0–1 loss and the risk as assessed using any nonnegative surrogate loss function. We show that this relationship gives nontrivial upper bounds on excess risk under the weakest possible condition on the loss function—that it satisfies a pointwise form of Fisher consistency for classification. The relationship is based on a simple variational transformation of the loss function that is easy to compute in many applications. We also present a refined version of this result in the case of low noise, and show that in this case, strictly convex loss functions lead to faster rates of convergence of the risk than would be implied by standard uniform convergence arguments. Finally, we present applications of our results to the estimation of convergence rates in function classes that are scaled convex hulls of a finite-dimensional base class, with a variety of commonly used loss functions.

Boosting the margin: A new explanation for the effectiveness of voting methods

One of the surprising recurring phenomena observed in experiments with boosting is that the test error of the generated classifier usually does not increase as its size becomes very large, and often is observed to decrease even after the training error reaches zero. In this paper, we show that this phenomenon is related to the distribution of margins of the training examples with respect to the generated voting classification rule, where the margin of an example is simply the difference between the number of correct votes and the maximum number of votes received by any incorrect label. We show that techniques used in the analysis of Vapnik's support vector classifiers and of neural networks with small weights can be applied to voting methods to relate the margin distribution to the test error. We also show theoretically and experimentally that boosting is especially effective at increasing the margins of the training examples. Finally, we compare our explanation to those based on the bias-variance decomposition.

Fast rates for estimation error and oracle inequalities for model section

We consider complexity penalization methods for model selection. These methods aim to choose a model to optimally trade off estimation and approximation errors by minimizing the sum of an empirical risk term and a complexity penalty. It is well known that if we use a bound on the maximal deviation between empirical and true risks as a complexity penalty, then the risk of our choice is no more than the approximation error plus twice the complexity penalty. There are many cases, however, where complexity penalties like this give loose upper bounds on the estimation error. In particular, if we choose a function from a suitably simple convex function class with a strictly convex loss function, then the estimation error (the difference between the risk of the empirical risk minimizer and the minimal risk in the class) approaches zero at a faster rate than the maximal deviation between empirical and true risks. In this paper, we address the question of whether it is possible to design a complexity penalized model selection method for these situations. We show that, provided the sequence of models is ordered by inclusion, in these cases we can use tight upper bounds on estimation error as a complexity penalty. Surprisingly, this is the case even in situations when the difference between the empirical risk and true risk (and indeed the error of any estimate of the approximation error) decreases much more slowly than the complexity penalty. We give an oracle inequality showing that the resulting model selection method chooses a function with risk no more than the approximation error plus a constant times the complexity penalty.

Local Rademacher complexities

We propose new bounds on the error of learning algorithms in terms of a data-dependent notion of complexity. The estimates we establish give optimal rates and are based on a local and empirical version of Rademacher averages, in the sense that the Rademacher averages are computed from the data, on a subset of functions with small empirical error. We present some applications to classification and prediction with convex function classes, and with kernel classes in particular.

Measuring the preference for dwelling characteristics of Melbourne : railway stations and house prices

The relationship between public transportation and home values has proven to be complex, with studies providing divergent findings. Using Victorian Valuer General Data for 2009, this paper applies a hedonic pricing approach to the Melbourne metropolitan housing market in order to estimate the impacts of proximity to a train station on residential property prices. The findings reveal a negative impact on dwelling price for those properties within 125 metres from a train station and a positive relationship between dwelling price and proximity for properties more than 125 metres away.