Manipulating resource allocation in plants

The distribution of nutrients and assimilates in different organs and tissues is in a constant state of flux throughout the growth and development of a plant. At key stages during the life cycle profound changes occur, and perhaps one of the most critical of these is during seed filling. By restricting the competition for reserves in Arabidopsis plants, the ability to manipulate seed size, seed weight, or seed content has been explored. Removal of secondary inflorescences and lateral branches resulted in a stimulation of elongation of the primary inflorescence and an increase in the distance between siliques. The pruning treatment also led to the development of longer and larger siliques that contained fewer, bigger seeds. This seems to be a consequence of a reduction in the number of ovules that develop and an increase in the fatty acid content of the seeds that mature. The data show that shoot architecture could have a substantial impact on the partitioning of reserves between vegetative and reproductive tissues and could be an important trait for selection in rapid phenotyping screens to optimize crop performance.

Asset allocation, cross-class correlation and the structure of property returns

Practical applications of portfolio optimisation tend to proceed on a “top down” basis where funds are allocated first at asset class level (between, say, bonds, cash, equities and real estate) and then, progressively, at sub-class level (within property to sectors, office, retail, industrial for example). While there are organisational benefits from such an approach, it can potentially lead to sub-optimal allocations when compared to a “global” or “side-by-side” optimisation. This will occur where there are correlations between sub-classes across the asset divide that are masked in aggregation – between, for instance, City offices and the performance of financial services stocks. This paper explores such sub-class linkages using UK monthly stock and property data. Exploratory analysis using clustering procedures and factor analysis suggests that property performance and equity performance are distinctive: there is little persuasive evidence of contemporaneous or lagged sub-class linkages. Formal tests of the equivalence of optimised portfolios using top-down and global approaches failed to demonstrate significant differences, whether or not allocations were constrained. While the results may be a function of measurement of market returns, it is those returns that are used to assess fund performance. Accordingly, the treatment of real estate as a distinct asset class with diversification potential seems justified.

On reliability analysis of multi-categorical forecasts

Reliability analysis of probabilistic forecasts, in particular through the rank histogram or Talagrand diagram, is revisited. Two shortcomings are pointed out: Firstly, a uniform rank histogram is but a necessary condition for reliability. Secondly, if the forecast is assumed to be reliable, an indication is needed how far a histogram is expected to deviate from uniformity merely due to randomness. Concerning the first shortcoming, it is suggested that forecasts be grouped or stratified along suitable criteria, and that reliability is analyzed individually for each forecast stratum. A reliable forecast should have uniform histograms for all individual forecast strata, not only for all forecasts as a whole. As to the second shortcoming, instead of the observed frequencies, the probability of the observed frequency is plotted, providing and indication of the likelihood of the result under the hypothesis that the forecast is reliable. Furthermore, a Goodness-Of-Fit statistic is discussed which is essentially the reliability term of the Ignorance score. The discussed tools are applied to medium range forecasts for 2 m-temperature anomalies at several locations and lead times. The forecasts are stratified along the expected ranked probability score. Those forecasts which feature a high expected score turn out to be particularly unreliable.

Reliability, sufficiency, and the decomposition of proper scores

Scoring rules are an important tool for evaluating the performance of probabilistic forecasting schemes. A scoring rule is called strictly proper if its expectation is optimal if and only if the forecast probability represents the true distribution of the target. In the binary case, strictly proper scoring rules allow for a decomposition into terms related to the resolution and the reliability of a forecast. This fact is particularly well known for the Brier Score. In this article, this result is extended to forecasts for finite-valued targets. Both resolution and reliability are shown to have a positive effect on the score. It is demonstrated that resolution and reliability are directly related to forecast attributes that are desirable on grounds independent of the notion of scores. This finding can be considered an epistemological justification of measuring forecast quality by proper scoring rules. A link is provided to the original work of DeGroot and Fienberg, extending their concepts of sufficiency and refinement. The relation to the conjectured sharpness principle of Gneiting, et al., is elucidated.

Estimating reliability and resolution of probability forecasts through decomposition of the empirical score

References (20)Cited By (1)Export CitationAboutAbstract Proper scoring rules provide a useful means to evaluate probabilistic forecasts. Independent from scoring rules, it has been argued that reliability and resolution are desirable forecast attributes. The mathematical expectation value of the score allows for a decomposition into reliability and resolution related terms, demonstrating a relationship between scoring rules and reliability/resolution. A similar decomposition holds for the empirical (i.e. sample average) score over an archive of forecast–observation pairs. This empirical decomposition though provides a too optimistic estimate of the potential score (i.e. the optimum score which could be obtained through recalibration), showing that a forecast assessment based solely on the empirical resolution and reliability terms will be misleading. The differences between the theoretical and empirical decomposition are investigated, and specific recommendations are given how to obtain better estimators of reliability and resolution in the case of the Brier and Ignorance scoring rule.

Aligning asset allocation and real estate investment: some lessons from the last cycle

Asset allocation is concerned with the development of multi--‐asset portfolio strategies that are likely to meet an investor’s objectives based on the interaction of expected returns, risk, correlation and implementation from a range of distinct asset classes or beta sources. Challenges associated with the discipline are often particularly significant in private markets. Specifically, composition differences between the ‘index’ or ‘benchmark’ universe and the investible universe mean that there can often be substantial and meaningful deviations between the investment characteristics implied in asset allocation decisions and those delivered by investment teams. For example, while allocation decisions are often based on relatively low--‐risk diversified real estate ‘equity’ exposure, implementation decisions frequently include exposure to higher risk forms of the asset class as well as investments in debt based instruments. These differences can have a meaningful impact on the contribution of the asset class to the overall portfolio and, therefore, lead to a potential misalignment between asset allocation decisions and implementation. Despite this, the key conclusion from this paper is not that real estate investors should become slaves to a narrowly defined mandate based on IPD / NCREIF or other forms of benchmark replication. The discussion suggests that such an approach would likely lead to the underutilization of real estate in multi--‐asset portfolio strategies. Instead, it is that to achieve asset allocation alignment, real estate exposure should be divided into multiple pools representing distinct forms of the asset class. In addition, the paper suggests that associated investment guidelines and processes should be collaborative and reflect the portfolio wide asset allocation objectives of each pool. Further, where appropriate they should specifically target potential for ‘additional’ beta or, more marginally, ‘alpha’.