<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: New Blog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.drscottfranklin.net/2006/01/19/new-blog/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.drscottfranklin.net/2006/01/19/new-blog/</link>
	<description>Ramblings of a Christian Mathematician and Bioinformaticist</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:13:55 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: natural blogarithms &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Debugged!!: A math blog by a Christian Mathematician</title>
		<link>http://blog.drscottfranklin.net/2006/01/19/new-blog/comment-page-1/#comment-157</link>
		<dc:creator>natural blogarithms &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Debugged!!: A math blog by a Christian Mathematician</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2006 04:43:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.drscottfranklin.net/2006/01/19/new-blog/#comment-157</guid>
		<description>[...] I finally hacked it. (see previous post). During a road trip to watch the basketball teams play in OK City, I finally discovered the problem with the code where we were using a nonlinear optimizer to determine the optimal portifolio by minimizing a quantity called, &#8220;Value at Risk.&#8221; Basically, the problem boiled down the fact that the optimization algorithms require a deterministic result. We are using a gradient reduction technique to minimize the objective function. In essence, you take small steps in the direction of steepest descent, but our objective function involved a bootstrapping technique that appoximates the 1st (or k-th) percentile of portfolio returns. The appoximation was based on randomly sampling with replacement from the history of returns, then calculating the 1st (or k-th) percentile. Because of the randomness, a single choice of stock/fund distribution can produce a different Value at Risk in different iterations. With all that said, we can now correct the problem, Yeehaw! [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I finally hacked it. (see previous post). During a road trip to watch the basketball teams play in OK City, I finally discovered the problem with the code where we were using a nonlinear optimizer to determine the optimal portifolio by minimizing a quantity called, &#8220;Value at Risk.&#8221; Basically, the problem boiled down the fact that the optimization algorithms require a deterministic result. We are using a gradient reduction technique to minimize the objective function. In essence, you take small steps in the direction of steepest descent, but our objective function involved a bootstrapping technique that appoximates the 1st (or k-th) percentile of portfolio returns. The appoximation was based on randomly sampling with replacement from the history of returns, then calculating the 1st (or k-th) percentile. Because of the randomness, a single choice of stock/fund distribution can produce a different Value at Risk in different iterations. With all that said, we can now correct the problem, Yeehaw! [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.863 seconds -->
