Paper detail

Moderate deviations for importance sampling estimators of risk measures

Importance sampling has become an important tool for the computation of tail-based risk measures. Since such quantities are often determined mainly by rare events standard Monte Carlo can be inefficient and importance sampling provides a way to speed up computations. This paper considers moderate deviations for the weighted empirical process, the process analogue of the weighted empirical measure, arising in importance sampling. The moderate deviation principle is established as an extension of existing results. Using a delta method for large deviations established by Gao and Zhao (Ann. Statist., 2011) together with classical large deviation techniques, the moderate deviation principle for the weighted empirical process is extended to functionals of the weighted empirical process which correspond to risk measures. The main results are moderate deviation principles for importance sampling estimators of the quantile function of a distribution and Expected Shortfall.

preprint2013arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.