Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

HFEPX · Eval paper review

The Self Driving Portfolio: Agentic Architecture for Institutional Asset Management

Andrew Ang, Nazym Azimbayev, Andrey Kim

Published

Apr 2, 2026

Citations

0

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

40/100 (Low)

Extraction confidence

45% (Low)

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Rater population

Not reported

Signals refreshed

Apr 2, 2026

Open arXiv Find implementation Shortlist (0) RSS feed

Tags

Coding Critique Edit

Should you rely on this paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

Background context only.

What to verify

Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.

Main weakness

The available metadata is too thin to trust this as a primary source.

Human feedback signal
Detected
From extracted signals
Evaluation signal
Weak or implicit
Validate from full paper
Usefulness for eval research
40/100
Adjacent candidate

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here

Human Eval Papers LLM-as-Judge Papers Pairwise Preference Papers Tool-Use Evaluation Search

Abstract

Agentic AI shifts the investor's role from analytical execution to oversight. We present an agentic strategic asset allocation pipeline in which approximately 50 specialized agents produce capital market assumptions, construct portfolios using over 20 competing methods, and critique and vote on each other's output. A researcher agent proposes new portfolio construction methods not yet represented, and a meta-agent compares past forecasts against realized returns and rewrites agent code and prompts to improve future performance. The entire pipeline is governed by the Investment Policy Statement--the same document that guides human portfolio managers can now constrain and direct autonomous agents.

What we could verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

partial

Critique Edit

Directly usable for protocol triage.

"Agentic AI shifts the investor's role from analytical execution to oversight."

Evaluation Modes

missing

None explicit

Validate eval design from full paper text.

"Agentic AI shifts the investor's role from analytical execution to oversight."

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"Agentic AI shifts the investor's role from analytical execution to oversight."

Benchmarks / Datasets

missing

Not extracted

No benchmark anchors detected.

"Agentic AI shifts the investor's role from analytical execution to oversight."

Reported Metrics

missing

Not extracted

No metric anchors detected.

"Agentic AI shifts the investor's role from analytical execution to oversight."

Benchmarks and datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported metrics

No metric terms were extracted from the available abstract.

Human feedback details
Uses human feedback
Yes
Feedback types
Critique Edit
Rater population
Not reported
Expertise required
Coding
Evaluation details
Evaluation modes
None
Agentic eval
None
Quality controls
Not reported
Evidence quality
Low
Use this page as
Background context only

Research brief

Metadata summary

Agentic AI shifts the investor's role from analytical execution to oversight.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key takeaways

  • Agentic AI shifts the investor's role from analytical execution to oversight.
  • We present an agentic strategic asset allocation pipeline in which approximately 50 specialized agents produce capital market assumptions, construct portfolios using over 20 competing methods, and critique and vote on each other's output.
  • A researcher agent proposes new portfolio construction methods not yet represented, and a meta-agent compares past forecasts against realized returns and rewrites agent code and prompts to improve future performance.

Researcher actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Check the full text for explicit evaluation design choices (raters, protocol, and metrics).
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Recommended queries

Contribution summary

  • Agentic AI shifts the investor's role from analytical execution to oversight.
  • We present an agentic strategic asset allocation pipeline in which approximately 50 specialized agents produce capital market assumptions, construct portfolios using over 20 competing methods, and critique and vote on each other's output.
  • A researcher agent proposes new portfolio construction methods not yet represented, and a meta-agent compares past forecasts against realized returns and rewrites agent code and prompts to improve future performance.

Why it matters for eval

  • Agentic AI shifts the investor's role from analytical execution to oversight.
  • We present an agentic strategic asset allocation pipeline in which approximately 50 specialized agents produce capital market assumptions, construct portfolios using over 20 competing methods, and critique and vote on each other's output.

Researcher checklist

  • Human feedback protocol is explicit

    Detected: Critique Edit

  • Evaluation mode is explicit

    No clear evaluation mode extracted.

  • Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Metric reporting is present

    No metric terms extracted.