Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Latent-Regime Bias Auditing for Volatility Forecasting

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2608.01599 v1 pith:7WWJIRHX submitted 2026-08-03 cs.LG

Latent-Regime Bias Auditing for Volatility Forecasting

classification cs.LG
keywords volatilityforecastsregimesaggregatebiasforecastingaccuracyaccurate
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Volatility forecasts are commonly evaluated with aggregate accuracy metrics such as RMSE and MAE, but these metrics can hide conditional failures that matter for risk management. This paper proposes a model-agnostic audit framework for evaluating whether volatility forecasts remain reliable across latent market regimes. We learn time-series representations of market-state windows, cluster them into regimes using only training information, assign regimes out of sample, and compare aggregate forecast behavior with regime-conditional bias, tail-underprediction, and underprediction-sensitive economic losses. Applied to daily volatility forecasting across cryptocurrency and ETF assets, the audit shows that models with competitive aggregate accuracy can still exhibit substantial regime-specific bias and severe tail underprediction. The results suggest that volatility forecasting should be evaluated not only by average error, but also by where and how forecasts become unreliable. Our framework shifts forecast evaluation from asking which model is most accurate on average to identifying the market regimes in which apparently accurate forecasts fail conditionally. Reproducibility: https://github.com/arthurchagas1/Latent-Regime-Bias-Auditing-for-Volatility-Forecasting

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.