Supervision guide.

Abstract

This document is subject to changes due to new regulations dictated by the programme management, academic department and/or the university. It is also subject to a new and improved set of recommendations given my experience using this document in the past. Please note that all recommendations and guidance in this document apply for students that agree to work under my supervision mainly in Mexico and UK. If there is any discrepancy between this document and the official guidelines or regulations dictated by the academic programme or the university, then the rule is to follow the official guidelines. This document is a work in progress, and not all the material taken from publicly available sources has been properly referenced.

Back to Quantitative Finance with

---

1 Introduction.

Welcome . If you are reading this document, it is because we have agreed or we are in the process of agreeing that I will supervise your project, thesis, or dissertation whether it is research oriented, software, or consultancy based. In short, I will simply use the word project from now on. I am confident that we can develop an interesting project, and I have high expectations about your overall performance either if you are an individual or a team. You should be confident that I have more than enough academic credentials, experience, and interest to help you in this process regardless of the scope, approach, and the topic of your project. You can find my full and updated academic curriculum here. This is the Zoom link for meetings: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/9209945512. Once again, welcome.

The objective of this document is twofold: (1) explain the supervision process, and (2) explain the project contents and structure.

Our common goal is to produce a solid and interesting project which meets the university quality standards, my own expectations as supervisor, and your own interests as students. I expect the best academic performance that you can achieve, and perhaps even more. You must expect me to support you and guide you in the best way possible to achieve our ultimate objective which is to produce a high-quality project and communicate its significance with authority. For this purpose, you also must know that from now on, part of my time, my knowledge, interest, and experience are currently at your service. I enjoy the supervision process because I always meet extraordinary people that creates an interesting project in a subject that I find interesting.

You should know that there are several kinds of projects or thesis depending on their scope, originality and contribution to the professional or academic field. We can broadly differentiate between undergraduate (not very common), master, and PhD thesis. All of them should aim to contribute to the academic and/or professional field at differentiated levels, and represent clear evidence that the candidate or the student is an expert in his or her area of study. However, the level, depth, impact, quality, and significance of that contribution depend on many factors. These include: the aspired academic degree, the time availability, the academic rigor of the designated supervisor, and/or the general quality standards of the university and/or academic department.

Your project represents a way to differentiate yourself among the rest of your colleagues in the job market as you may have the same degree but different project topic. I will try to clearly communicate whether you are meeting my own standards because this will influence the mark you will officially receive in your academic records. In any case, you can ask me directly whether you are meeting my expectations and I will answer as clearly as possible. This may be obvious, but you should know we (students and supervisor) are not competing, we are collaborating to reach our final objective which is to end up with a high-quality project to submit on time. I will also try to keep a respectful, professional, and friendly relationship to facilitate our communication and contribute to reach our final objective.

Your thesis project is also an opportunity to develop or engender your current research skills. Research skills are not exclusive for consolidated researchers, leading authors, and academics with a PhD degree. Research skills are also very important in the current job market and industry, which nowadays has become highly competitive and demands professionals with a formal approach to address and solve problems following a modern and innovative scientific approach. A professional with the ability to learn, innovate, and develop applied research projects, are very valuable in the job market. You are expected to be good at learning well and fast by yourself, and gathering research skills can help you in this respect. It is not easy to gather research skills alone and isolated from academia, this is why one typical way to get them is by letting experienced researchers train enthusiastic students.

You are not only going to develop new skills during the supervision period. Ideally, you will also have the opportunity to use your current professional skills and specialization to address the project objectives. Then, it is important to let me know who you are so we can take advantage of your unique and distinctive professional skills, interests, and abilities to develop an interesting project.

1.1 Using generative AI tools responsibly.

“Stand on the shoulders of giants” is a phrase associated with Google Scholar, and it captures an important idea. We develop new products thanks to others who created improved materials. We implement better models thanks to others who developed theories that explain how the world works. In short, we innovate thanks to others’ innovations.

Generative AI tools such as ChatGPT can improve the way we learn, work, and advance projects. The benefits can be large, but the risks are also real. The more powerful the tool, the more important it becomes to use it responsibly.

One of the most frustrating aspects of learning is failing to understand a topic. Traditionally, students reread material, practice repeatedly, and slowly improve. Now you can upload a PDF and ask an AI assistant to explain it. You can slow the explanation down, request examples, go step by step through procedures, or ask for clarification of underlying logic.

In research projects, many students struggle to implement a methodology described by others. A well guided interaction with an AI assistant can help bridge the gap between a methodology described in a paper and working code that runs correctly and produces results. In that sense, an AI assistant can support your workflow, as long as you remain the one who understands and validates the work.

The central risk is uncritical acceptance. You cannot use these tools effectively unless you have a working understanding of the topic. An AI tool may generate code that produces a convincing plot or a clean looking table while being wrong in a way you do not notice. If you cannot detect that problem, you may end up relying on outputs you do not truly understand. That defeats the purpose of a dissertation, which is to develop your research judgement.

For this reason, the rule is simple. You may use AI tools to support learning, drafting, coding, and debugging, but you remain responsible for correctness, interpretation, and academic integrity. You must be able to explain what the tool produced, why it is appropriate, and how you checked it. Supervision exists to guide your decisions and to reduce the risk of building a project on errors that look convincing.

Used responsibly, these tools can help you learn faster and attempt more ambitious work. Used irresponsibly, they can weaken learning and reduce the quality and credibility of the dissertation.

2 FAQ.

Here are a few frequently asked questions that most of my students have about their projects:

1. Who is supposed to propose the project topic? There are several ways to proceed in this respect. One typical way is that students declare their main interests; then I can propose several alternatives; and we can discuss until we define the most appropriate project for you. Proposing topics that you as a student do not want to do is also a valid way to define the project topic. Another way is that students pick from a list, so programme administrators can match students and supervisors.

2. Are there any restrictions or limitations in terms of the topics you can supervise? Not really. I can supervise a wide variety of consultancy oriented or research projects in the area of business, economics, statistics, data science, finance, management, its combinations, extensions, sub-areas, and other more specific and newer topics. I have a marked preference to select a quantitative approach in the area of economics and/or finance, but in short there are virtually no restrictions in terms of the topics I can supervise within a business school.

3. Are we supposed to produce a very long and complicated computer code? Your project, and more specifically the empirical section that will lead to your original results will most likely be developed in R and/or Python given the quantitative nature of the project that I will try to pursue with you. However, I strongly believe that the project contribution is far more important than the methodology or the specific way or software to produce results. Then, you can conduct your empirical analysis using any software. Your thesis could be intense in computer programming or not. This will depend on the project itself, our preliminary discussion about the project characteristics, your ability to do computer programming, your willingness to learn computer programming, the project objectives, and scope. A project that relies on computer programming is usually more ambitious and with a more interesting contribution as it has virtually no barriers or frontiers in terms of data analysis and reaching original findings. It also helps to reach repeatability and reproducibility, which are key indicators of the quality of experiments and analyses. In short, the answer is: it depends.

4. Is there a minimum and maximum page limit for my project? You should look at the official university or academic department guidelines for this. In my personal view, the extension is mostly determined by the achievement of the project objectives and not in the number of pages. Page number is not necessarily related with project quality, but I understand it can be used to meet some standards dictated by the academic programme. In any case, I will decide whether a specific section in your project is sufficiently developed or not. Just as a reference, Nash (1951) thesis was 26 pages long, and had two references in the bibliography. It is also true that few pages can be a sign of a lack of a deep analysis. In short, I will clearly inform you in case you are falling too short in terms of page limit. If I do not do that, then you have the obligation to ask.

5. What would be your very best recommendation for us as students? Inform me regularly about your progress, and incorporate all my feedback in your progress. Read this document on a regular basis. Keep quality standards as high as possible. Remember this is your project, not mine, I am only trying to help you reach your higher standard possible. If for any reason I take too long to answer you back, please insist.

6. Do you ask for weekly progress reports? Not really. I rather prefer to ask for reports based on tasks or tasks progress. The process is rather simple: you send me a draft, I give you comments by email and/or Zoom, you incorporate my comments, you send me a new improved draft, and the process start again. This is the Zoom link for meetings: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/9209945512. Depending on the programe, you may have to submit mid-term drafts/presentations or not.

7. Are we going to write our project in MS-Word? There are several alternatives to write your project. You can use MS-Word, Google Docs, Overleaf, R Markdown, or any other \(\LaTeX{}\) compiler. My recommendation is to use Quarto within RStudio. In my view, Quarto is the best technology for writing a thesis due to its versatility in output formats (PDF, HTML, Word, EPUB), seamless integration of code for reproducible results, high-quality typesetting with \(\LaTeX{}\) support, extensive customization options for adhering to academic standards, and facilitation of collaborative work through version control with Git. These features make Quarto a robust, flexible, and efficient tool for producing and maintaining a high-quality thesis.

8. We are a team. Are we going to have the same individual mark? Not necessarily. I may include auto and co-evaluations to know more about your view about the team members contribution to the team work. This may influence my marking when dealing with team or group projects. In case the programme rules require to submit the same mark then we will do so.

9. How frequent are we, as a team, going to communicate with you? There might be an answer in the official student guidelines dictated by the academic programme. However, in my case you are free to contact me whenever you need. I am interested that you understand what has to be done so I can answer questions by email, Pumble, or have Zoom meetings to make that clear. You are expected to show that you can work independently, but this does not mean that you will be alone in the process. So, feel free to contact me.

10. More in future versions of this document.

3 Project structure.

Your project will be formed by one single document. A typical project structure is formed by: title, abstract, introduction, literature review, methodology, results, conclusion, and references. Although this is the physical order of your document, we usually write it in different order. In my experience, you should start with the literature review as you need to understand what has been done in the past, then you start producing some basic results or preliminary analysis. Once you have some clear progress in these two sections you write the methodology, introduction, conclusion and the abstract.

Writing a dissertation in the order of appearance of the sections is impractical because the research process is iterative and non-linear. Key sections like the introduction and conclusion require insights from your results and discussion to be meaningful and accurately framed. Additionally, the development of ideas, literature review, and methodology often evolve as new data and analysis emerge, necessitating revisions across multiple sections. Therefore, a flexible approach allows for continuous refinement and coherence, ensuring that each section effectively supports the overall argument and findings of the dissertation.

3.1 Title and cover page.

The title normally changes and evolves during the supervision process. A good title has the relevant keywords that can help the reader to understand quickly and unambiguously what the project is about. A good title represents the whole contents. It is very common to start with one title and end up with a different one before the final submission. This is fine if the title really reflects the contents and the approach of the project. I recommend you to propose an early title as soon as possible and let it change depending on the progress of your work, new discoveries, and on my recommendations. Changing the title is not necessarily a sign of weak planning. A good advice is asking yourself: Does the title accurately reflect the contents? And if the answer is not a clear yes, then you will have to edit your title.

Your document also needs a cover page that includes your names, the name of your program, the name of your supervisor, the name of the university, and date. You probably have a cover page template given by the academic programme or university guidelines.

3.2 Acknowledgments.

This section is entirely optional. Sometimes students are interested to write thankful notes for parents, friends, boyfriends, girlfriends, pets, and occasionally for his or her supervisor or other professors. You can write a unique section as a team, or divide it as one acknowledgment per team member. This is the only section that obviously needs no revision at all by myself.

3.3 Abstract.

An abstract is a catchy text of 100 to 200 words that synthesize the entire document including the main results or findings. It aims to persuade readers to read the full document, it acts as a shop window, enticing people to step inside. This is why the abstract is normally written and rewritten close to the end of the document production. A good abstract is concise, succinct, and should be enough to get a pretty good and clear idea about what the research project is about without the need of reading the entire document. In fact, I argue that a potential reader can decide whether to read the whole document or not simply by reading the abstract.

An abstract is not a summary of the introduction section, it is not an executive summary, it is rather a synthesis of the whole document. This is a good illustration to differentiate a summary from a synthesis.

An abstract includes what is your paper/project about, why it is relevant, how did you do it, what did you find, and why your findings are important. The following is an example of a nice 95 words abstract by Fama and French (1993). Please note how effectively the authors communicate their influential contribution using a clear language and a straightforward writing style.

This paper identifies five common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. There are three stock-market factors: an overall market factor and factors related to firm size and book-to-market equity. There are two bond-market factors, related to maturity and default risks. Stock returns have shared variation due to the stock-market factors, and they are linked to bond returns through shared variation in the bond-market factors. Except for low-grade corporates, the bond-market factors capture the common variation in bond returns. Most important, the five factors seem to explain average returns on stocks and bonds.

After reading this abstract, everyone would be clear about whether to continue reading or not depending on their own interests.

The following points should always be featured.

Purpose. This is where you explain ‘why’ you undertook this study. If you are presenting new or novel research, explain the problem that you have solved. If you are building upon previous research, briefly explain why you felt it was important to do so. This is your opportunity to let readers know why you chose to study this topic or problem and its relevance. Let them know what your key argument or main finding is.

Study design/methodology/approach. This is ‘how’ you did it. Let readers know exactly what you did to reach your results. For example, did you undertake interviews? Did you carry out an experiment in the lab? What tools, methods, protocols or datasets did you use?

Findings. Here you can explain ‘what’ you found during your study, whether it answers the problem you set out to explore, and whether your hypothesis was confirmed. You need to be very clear and direct and give exact figures, rather than generalise. It is important not to exaggerate or create an expectation that your paper do not fulfill.

Originality/value. This is your opportunity to make a clear and succinct case for the value of your results. It is a good idea to ask colleagues whether your analysis is balanced and fair and again, it is important not to exaggerate. You can also reflect on what future research steps could be.

I also recommend you to include a JEL (Journal of Economic Literature) classification system because it is a standard method of classifying scholarly literature in the field of economics (finance is a field within economics). This system is used to classify articles, dissertations, books, book reviews, and working papers in EconLit, and in many other applications. For further descriptions and examples, just Google the JEL Codes Guide.

As an alternative, you may substitute the abstract by an executive summary of no more than one page long.

3.4 Introduction.

The introduction typically contains and outline of an unresolved issue or problem to be addressed and the added value of your own approach. It also highlights the relevance of the topic, contains a description of what is known about the problem, a research question, aim or objective. Introductions tend to move from the general to the more specific and introduce readers to the research presented and its significance by providing some background context.

It is important to include the main results in a very early section of your research project like the abstract and/or the introduction because you must assume that the reader is lazy and impatient throughout your writing process. If you incorporate this assumption about your reader in your writing style you will be alright as this makes you think twice whether your explanations are clear and complete enough. Please be aware that if you include a synthesis of your results in this section, then you will have to complete the introduction in a late stage of your project. The introduction should be (ideally) nontechnical, appealing, engaging, and it should motivate the reader to continue reading your research paper with a marked interest and enthusiasm.

In this section, it is convenient to define relevant terms or concepts included in your title, and describe your plan of organization (a brief description of the following sections). Defining the relevant terms or concepts is important because it will help you as an author to put the reader in the right context and prepare him or her to read your project. You should not assume that the reader understands very well the main terms or concepts, so this is why you are expected to elaborate them in the introduction. The relevant terms or concepts are normally incorporated in the title, so you can take the introduction as an opportunity to explain in detail your own project title. The introduction shapes reader expectations of what they will find on reading your project, so take care to deliver on what you say you will do in the introduction. This is why this section is the second most important part of the whole document (the first one is presumably the abstract), so you have to be prepared to review it and polish the text as much as necessary, be prepared to edit, delete, write, rewrite and even start over from scratch.

I recommend you to read introductions of other published research papers because this can help you to write yours as you might copy the writing style of experienced authors and replicate it in your own work. When writing the introduction, make use of words and phrases to indicate coverage: examines, presents, provides an overview, outlines, analyses, explores. And indicate the key message: demonstrates, highlights, provides insight into, argues.

Common mistakes that you must avoid in writing this section includes:

• Take extracts of other sections of your project to fill out the introduction. This is not recommended because the text will end up being a Frankenstein document. Write original and unique paragraphs in every single section of your dissertation.
• The introduction has many different writing styles. This is not recommended because it will be difficult to read and follow. Sometimes students work on a shared document and this is fine if you review and make sure the writing style is consistent throughout the document because otherwise your document will be very hard to read and understand. The reader should have the sense of unity or cohesion when reading your project. This is important because you are writing a document as a team, but the reader is an individual, so the document should be written in a very consistent style as if it were written by one single person.
• Remember the introduction is not a summary of your work. The introduction is rather an opportunity to engage the reader and reveal why he or she should spend time reading your project. You are writing for your reader, not for you, not for your supervisor.
• Confusing introduction. Sometimes you add many topics in the introduction that do not fully correspond to your own main objectives. If this happens, then the reader will be confused about what is your project about, the reader might misunderstand what is your main point. In order to avoid this, make sure that your introduction contents are very clearly and closely related to your main objectives. This will help you to avoid inconsistencies and confusions.
• You may also unintentionally announce that you do a lot of things in your project whereas you do less or different things. If this happens, the reader will be disappointed and confused.
• In a dissertation, the introduction should focus on providing context for the specific research problem, outlining its significance, and presenting the research objectives. It is not expected to cover extremely basic and fundamental issues, such as the definition of finance or its history before civilization, as these are assumed to be common knowledge for the intended academic audience. The introduction should directly relate to the specific study, setting the stage for the research without delving into overly elementary concepts.

3.5 Literature review.

The literature review is a description of work that has already been published in a particular field or on a specific topic. In the literature review you discuss how your own problem has been tackled in the past by other researchers and how your approach fits, complement, innovate, or extend the current knowledge or evidence about the topic. The literature review provides a rationale for your research in terms of what has been done in the past. In this section you should demonstrate that you understand very well what others have done and that you are clear about how your own view and approach differs from theirs.

In the literature review you explain how your project makes a clear contribution. You will need to support your own work based on some references related with your project and these references are expected to be published in recognized research papers. Not only that, I recommend that your references are from high-quality journals according to the Chartered Association of Business Schools (three stars and above), or SJR (Scientific Journal Rankings). Published papers in high-quality journals are not the most difficult to understand, they are simply the more interesting, the ones with significant impact in the field, the ones that concentrate the most significant contributions, and the ones in which you will find the most influential authors.

To establish your credibility, your literature review will typically need to do at least some (if not all) of the following effectively.

• Demonstrate that your research is rigorous and up-to-date by engaging with seminal and current work.
• Summarize relevant bodies of work and evaluate their strengths and weaknesses to demonstrate your critical understanding of the literature.
• Point out gaps in the literature or identify problems, issues remaining to be solved.
• Highlight key issues essential to your own research.
• Synthesize the main themes and arguments of a particular body of literature.
• Produce a brief historical survey or other context information in order to situate your research.
• Avoid list and paraphrase the content of the papers involved. Your review should show evidence of evaluation, and explore relationships between the material so that key themes emerge.

At the beginning, you might have some difficulties at finding those papers that you need to include in the literature review section. This is perfectly normal, do not feel too bad about it. There are many ways to start your search for literature including the university electronic library. However, my first recommendation here is to use the Google Scholar site (it must be the “scholar” site), this site allows you to look for published papers in a specific time frame, find papers of specific authors, and even look for papers that has a specific paper as a reference (forward looking). This is, if you find a good 2020 paper, you can ask Google Scholar to show 2021 to 2024 papers that includes the 2020 paper in their reference section, which is nice and useful. Please spend some time on Google Scholar and get familiar with this search engine designed to help researchers.

An additional difficulty you might face is to know which paper is good and which one is not for your literature review. My recommendation here is to start with a simple search, download a few documents and read them. You will soon realize that you may understand some things and you might not understand others, but that is fine and you have to keep reading and see how other authors have approached similar objectives like yours. Reading others will help you to see how they explain their own research and you could learn from that as well. When you find a good paper for your own, then it is a good idea to look at that paper references section (backward search, older papers); and look for other papers that have reference to this good paper (forward search, newer papers). Bear in mind that this section is not supposed to include all that you read; you have to incorporate only the relevant papers and references that are important to understand the nature of your own project.

Common mistakes in writing this section includes:

• Write about every single document that you found. This is not recommended as you are expected to include the papers that are more closely related with your own objectives or approach. The journey to find the right papers is not that important, what is important is the definite set of papers that are clearly related with your own research project.
• Start your literature review with a 1900 paper. This is usually not recommended because you will never end. Plus, we assume that the main relevant set of papers of a given current topic already incorporates previous years literature. A typical rule of thumb could be to read papers published in the past 10-15 years or so.
• Remember that every paper referenced in the project must be in the reference section and every paper listed in the reference section has to be referenced in the project. So please do this double check. Although, you may not face this issue if you use Quarto within RStudio.
• Avoid using the footnotes as a substitute to the reference section. In fact, avoid using footnotes in general, if it is outside the main body, it probably does not deserve to be included at all.
• Avoid (if possible) organize this section according to a historical approach. The time is normally not an appropriate approach because this is not a section about the strict chronological evolution of a given topic. Instead, this is about how a specific problem has been addressed in the past: you can start commenting about a 2016 paper and then a 2010 paper, and then a 2018 paper and that is fine. Therefore, you will have to figure out a logical way to present and comment about the selected papers, and this logical way is not necessarily time. The challenge here is to find out this coherent approach to develop your literature review. In Spanish we use the word hilo conductor to refer to this specific issue, just Google it.
• Another common mistake is to superficially report what you read. This is because reporting your reading requires a minimum intellectual effort. Instead, you must summarize, compare, contrast, analyze, explain, and evaluate others’ published work. This is more challenging and requires some research-skills.
• Copy and paste from others research papers must be avoided by all means. Your dissertation requires you to produce original text all the time. If you consider you are incapable of writing original text, then this is a clear sign that you have not read enough.
• There are many low-quality journals out there that accept almost any kind of paper for publication for a fee. The point here is to incorporate in your project a set of serious authors, serious journals. Also, if you are interested in getting published, I normally recommend my students to get away from these predatory journals. Google the concept of predatory journals to see the kind of damage that they cause to research and academia in general.

• If you do not find relevant literature, then the most likely reason is that you have not performed a good search. In other words, there is relevant literature out there, you just have to learn how to find them. Also, you might be looking for a topic which is so specific that you will have difficulties finding papers. In this case, try one degree less specific and you will find interesting literature.
• Avoid using references such as blogs, newspaper extracts, isolated quotes, Wikipedia, and other kind of source that do not follow a strict scientific method or do not follow a professional peer-review process. You are free to read those, but you are not expected to trust them to the point of incorporating them as a reference in your dissertation.

If your topic is widely discussed by the literature is good because you may select the most interesting papers to include in your literature review. On the other hand, if it is not, then you may not be looking correctly or you may have an innovative topic. This is also good because you may select the most interesting approach to contribute to the literature.

3.6 Methodology.

Your project will most likely include an empirical test, a valuation, data analysis, or model estimation so the methodology will provide a detailed assessment of the quantitative methods and data used in your project. The methodology section includes the model presentation, assumptions, equations, functions, and relevant estimation techniques. Math notation must be properly formatted by using the insert-equation feature available in MS-Word, markdown or in \(\LaTeX{}\).

The equations are supposed to be well formatted like this: \(E_0=V_0N(d_1)-De^{-rT}N(d_2)\).

This section must be very clear to the extent that someone could be able to replicate your own results simply by following this section. If this condition does not hold, then this section could be considered as incomplete. The methodology section also includes the description and source of the raw data used in the empirical exercise. You will have to indicate the software used and the version; in the case of R you are supposed to use: R Core Team (2024). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project.org/ It is not compulsory to reveal your R code but you are expected to provide all your methodological procedure and explain it very well.

One common mistake is to include procedures, equations or tests that are not used in the results section.

3.7 Results.

Are the results well-presented and have they been correctly interpreted? Is the analysis sufficiently rigorous? These are the typical questions that are expected to be addressed in the results section.

This section includes tables, plots, interactive plots, diagrams, graphs, and other complementary tools to show the results that will help you to meet your initial objectives, contrast your main hypothesis, and answer your research question as clearly, as explicit, and as complete as possible. This section will show the quality of the execution of the empirical exercise and methodology. Please bear in mind that the whole project should have clearly defined numbered sections and subsections. The equations, tables and figures should be properly numbered as well for an easier reference.

Here are four versions of the same set of results or data.

library(MASS)
m <- 2 # number of firms
n <- 10000 # number of simulations
rho_pos02 <- 0.2 # correlation
corr_pos02 <- matrix(rep(rho_pos02, m * m), m, m) # correlation matrix
diag(corr_pos02) <- 1
set.seed(130575)
x2 <- mvrnorm(n, mu = rep(0, m), Sigma = corr_pos02)
x2 <- data.frame(x2)
colnames(x2) <- c("f1", "f2")

For illustrative purposes, this is a 10,000 simulation of a multivariate normal distribution.

par(pty = "s") # Figures are shown in a perfect square (not a rectangle).
plot(x2, pch = ".", cex = 1) 
legend("bottomright", legend = c(paste(nrow(x2))), bty = "n")

Figure 3.1: A simple graph using the plot() funcion in R.

A density view.

library(ggplot2)
ggplot(x2, aes(x = f1, y = f2) ) +
  stat_density_2d(aes(fill = ..level..), geom = "polygon", 
                  colour = "white") +
    coord_fixed()

Figure 3.2: A density view using ggplot() function in R.

This is the 3-D rayshader video version of the plot above.

library(vembedr)
embed_url("https://youtu.be/3p-B19R8RwA")

And a fourth interactive version.

library(mnormt)
library(tidyverse)
library(plotly)
f <- function(x, y) dmnorm(cbind(x, y), c(0, 0), corr_pos02)
z <- outer(sort(x2[1:100,1]), sort(x2[1:100,2]), f)

plot_ly(type = "surface" , x = sort(x2[1:100,2]), 
        y = sort(x2[1:100,1]) , z = z ) %>%
layout(#title = "Surface",
       scene = list(xaxis = list(title = "f1", range = c(-2,2)),
                    yaxis = list(title = "f2", range = c(-2,2)), 
                    zaxis = list(title = "Density"))) %>%
hide_colorbar()

Figure 3.3: An interactive view.

You can see other results/figures examples related with risk management and credit risk here: Lozano (2024a); financial econometrics, time series and machine learning here: Lozano (2024c); financial options and VaR here: Lozano (2024d); and financial modeling here: Lozano (2024b).

If your abstract is good enough, people would most likely scroll down your paper to see your results. The design of your tables and graphs is expected to be as good to the extent that they would virtually need no explanation. In other words, they are expected to be almost self-explanatory and they must be free of any sort of confusing elements. The main challenge of this section is to organize your results in such a way that your reader will perfectly understand how these results help you to meet the original research question, evaluate your original hypothesis and objectives. Sometimes your introduction has to be altered given your results; this is OK as long as this contributes to strengthening your project by making it more consistent.

Normally, I recommend trying to think in a comic-oriented approach. This is, you will have to produce your figures and tables in such a way that they could be able to tell the story that you are interested to communicate. After producing the main figures and tables in the right order, then the process of explaining the results (or tell your story) becomes easier.

Typical mistakes in this section are:

• To include tables or plots that are difficult to relate to your original objectives. This will create confusion because the reader will not understand how these results help to address the main research questions.
• Include results that are difficult to read because the font is too small or the format is hard to understand.
• Include tables or plots from other authors. You are expected to show the main original results in this section, so taking results from other authors sends a very wrong signal to the reader.
• Fail to explain and interpret every single table and plot. You must remember that you are the one who is supposed to explain your results, not the reader.

You may also include an excessive amount of preliminary results, or you may get lost in the process and forget about your own declared objectives.

3.8 Discussion of results (optional).

This section will allow you to elaborate your analysis further and deeper. I usually argue that the uniqueness of your project relies on your approach, and the quality of your project relies mostly on the quality of your analysis, and I believe this section is where most of the deep analysis is done. Remember your reader is supposed to be lazy, so your reader needs you to explain your own results in an extremely detailed and specific way, so do not expect the reader to interpret your results by himself or herself, or read your mind. Interpretations, implications, explanations, and discussions are supposed to be elaborated in detail in this section.

I insist that the quality of your project will rely very much on the quality of your discussion of your own results, their implications, and the significance of your own and original findings with respect to the current literature. Here, my advice is to always read your work out loud, to yourself, parents or even to your pets. This is the best way to put you in the shoes of your reader. By doing this, you will clearly identify what you must delete, delete again, change order, write, rewrite, edit or simply start over again. The worst that can happen here is that your reader fails to understand you, and if this happens then the reader will no longer be interested in your work and will most likely consider it wrong or not worth the time.

3.9 Complementary results (optional).

These are normally useful to incorporate some extra consistency tests to evaluate whether your results are consistent and robust with different data-sets or different parameters in the experimental design. Not every thesis needs complementary results. Also, these might not represent the main core of your results, but they will complement your thesis and strengthen your conclusions.

3.10 Conclusion.

Here you draw together your key findings and tell readers what you think it all means. The conclusion will summarize your main results and elaborate on the future steps that you or someone else could take in order to explore your research question further. The conclusion is a good opportunity to move from a detailed to a general level of consideration that returns the topic to the context provided by the introduction, so in the conclusion you close the circle that started in the introduction. You might also suggest further research; this could reveal some good understanding about the scope, extensions, and limitations of your own project. The conclusion is not the same as the abstract. The conclusion might not make full sense by itself if you read it isolated. However, the abstract can be fully understandable without the need of reading the rest of the document. The conclusion should answer the question: what did you learn?

When reporting on your findings, however, do not merely list or repeat them from previous sections. Doing so gives no insight into the meanings you attach to these findings. Rather, draw together all findings into a coherent whole, and think about the weight and significance you attach to these findings in terms of your research objectives or questions. As not all findings will be equally important, you might want to think about them in terms of a scale of significance. Ask yourself the following questions.

• What do I consider most important about my findings in general and why?
• Which findings seem to be of greater or lesser significance and why?
• Are there any specific findings to which I want to draw particular attention and why?
• Is there anything unusual about any of my findings needing special mention and why?
• Has my methodology or anything else affected my interpretation of findings and is this something that needs to be discussed?
• Any other questions important for your research?

Avoid the following mistakes:

• Start a new topic or introduce new material.
• Repeat the introduction.
• Make obvious statements.
• Contradict anything you said earlier.

3.11 References.

This section should include every article, paper, book that you use to support your project. In the same way, every referenced article, paper, and book used in the project should be in the references section.

There are several formats you can follow to write this section. Some journal articles and books may have different formats and this might be confusing. My simple recommendation here is to just follow the APA style, there are many online resources that can help you to know more about the APA style. In fact, the university library can provide useful advice in this respect. Google Scholar has a nice feature that allows you to copy the reference of the paper in several formats including APA, ISO 690, MLA, Bib\(\TeX{}\), EndNote, RefMan and RefWorks.

In Bib\(\TeX{}\), a typical .bib file has entries like:

@article{fama1993common, title={Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds}, author={Fama, Eugene F and French, Kenneth R}, journal={Journal of financial economics}, volume={33}, number={1}, pages={3--56}, year={1993}, publisher={Elsevier} }

And every time you write @fama1993common you will get the correspondent reference Fama and French (1993) in the compiled file.

Understanding how to reference can be very helpful to avoid academic malpractice. There should be some student guidelines about academic malpractice regulations and how to avoid it. I recommend you to read those and contact me in case you need further assistance.

4 Writing style.

Writing should be a constant process – start now – do not wait until you have done all your research. Also, remember you must be prepared to edit your writing several times before it is ready.

The writing style is important because you might have a great idea but if you fail to communicate effectively nobody will take you seriously. Alternatively, you might have a regular idea but you are very convincing and you communicate it very well then everybody will listen to you. This section can help you understand the required writing style you have to use in your project.

Group projects can provide particular interpersonal challenges, as teams cope with difference of views, non-performing team members etc., and particular problems can arise at the writing stage. If you split up the sections among different people, then you will get different writing styles and even ideas about what the report is about. Ways of ensuring consistency includes swapping around writing and editing, so that the text gets seen by a different pair of eyes, or having an overall ‘master editor’.

Avoid using several and mixed verb tenses. I recommend you to use the simple present tense in most of your document. Keep the writing simple, straight, and clear. Complicated writing is often confusing. Sometimes the student thinks that a complex text is more formal or elegant and this is the opposite. Complex writing makes you sound small-minded. Simpler text is often more difficult to achieve but it is preferred in terms of clarity. Use past and future tense only in very limited cases and avoid contractions.

Mixed Verb Tenses: By the time you finish your dissertation, you will have learned so much, and you might have been reflecting on the journey that has brought you here, which started years ago when you first decided to pursue this degree. This mixture of past, present perfect, and future tenses can confuse readers and obscure the timeline of events.

Simple Present Tense: You learn a lot during your dissertation, and you reflect on the journey that starts when you decide to pursue this degree. Using the simple present tense keeps the timeline clear and makes the message easier to understand.

Use the active voice. In English, readers prefer the SVO sentence sequence: subject, verb, object. This is the active voice. For example: Passive sentences bore people. When you reverse the active sequence, you have the OVS or passive sequence: object, verb, subject. For example: People are bored by passive sentences. You cannot always use the active voice, but most writers should use it more often. In short, the more you read the better you write. In academic writing this applies very well, your writing will improve considerably if you consciously read high quality published papers. My recommendation is to use active voice.

Passive Voice: The results of the experiment were analyzed, and conclusions were drawn based on the data collected, which was then presented in the report. This passive construction can obscure clarity and make it unclear who performed the actions.

Active Voice: We analyzed the results of the experiment, drew conclusions based on the collected data, and presented them in the report. Using active voice clarifies who performed the actions and makes the writing more direct and engaging.

Detail. You are expected to write detailed explanations of what you are doing in your project. Most of the times when I review your drafts, I insist on this point several times. You must motivate and introduce every idea, explain it fully, elaborate on the nature of your objectives, and be very explicit in your methodology. You must show how well you understand the topics in your project and a detailed discussion helps you to achieve this objective. Consider the following example: (1) I grow lots of flowers in my backyard; (2) I grow 34 varieties of flowers in my backyard, including pink coneflowers, purple asters, yellow daylilies, Shasta daisies, and climbing clematis. Clearly (2) is more interesting than (1) simply because more details are provided and I can even imagine your backyard very clearly.

Clarity. This refers to the quality of coherence and intelligibility. You need to make sure your idea is clearly communicated. Sometimes sentences and paragraphs are not very well connected and this leads to some confusion about what is your main point. In this case, you will have to review your text and make sure every single sentence and paragraph are effectively contributing to communicating the idea correctly. Write use instead of utilize, near instead of close proximity, help instead of facilitate, for instead of in the amount of, start instead of commence.

Paragraph structure. A good paragraph contains only one major point of discussion. All the sentences in the paragraph should relate to this one idea and should flow from one another. If you read one sentence aloud and you need to pause for breath, insert a comma.

Write clear sentences. One golden rule for clarity is that a sentence should be easy to understand the first time you read it. If it is not, then think about restructuring it or splitting it in two.

Avoid illogicalities and errors in reasoning. These include contradicting something you said in one paragraph in the next (or even the same paragraph), complete jumps of sense between or within paragraphs, so that one statement does not follow on from another, deducing incorrect conclusions from evidence.

Avoid wordiness. Delete any words which do not add to the meaning. Some words may be correct grammatically, but they do not really add anything to the sentence.

Reduce wordy verbs.

• From is aware, has knowledge of, to simply: knows.
• From is taking, to simply: takes.
• From are indications, to simply: indicate.
• From are suggestive, to simply: suggests.

Coherence. This is about being logical and consistent in your writing. It is worthwhile to constantly question yourself whether your paragraph or section makes sense or not. If not, you will have to work on your coherence. Coherence is about confirming that the structure of your manuscript is logical and your meaning is clear.

Cohesion. This is about forming a united whole. Sometimes four team members contribute to writing a specific section and it turns out that the section lacks of cohesion because it looks as different views and unarticulated paragraphs. You will have to make sure your text is in fact a unity. Words and phrases can control and order the logic within a paragraph’s argument. You can link ideas using words that show a logical relationship: therefore, however, but, consequently, thus, even so, conversely, nevertheless, moreover, in addition, and many more. Whatever its form, an intra-paragraph transition should be unobtrusive, shifting readers easily from one topic to the next.

Flow. Your reader should be able to follow your line of discussion, see how you are moving your discussion from one topic to the next in developing your overall point of view. In other words, paragraphs should be properly linked to ensure coherence.

There is an interesting and relevant recommendation by Gary Provost about academic writing. This summarize very well how you are expected to write:

This sentence has five words. Here are five more words. Five-word sentences are fine. But several together become monotonous. Listen to what is happening. The writing is getting boring. The sound of it drones. It’s like a stuck record. The ear demands some variety. Now listen. I vary the sentence length, and I create music. Music. The writing sings. It has a pleasant rhythm, a lilt, a harmony. I use short sentences. And I use sentences of medium length. And sometimes, when I am certain the reader is rested, I will engage him with a sentence of considerable length, a sentence that burns with energy and builds with all the impetus of a crescendo, the roll of the drums, the crash of the cymbals–sounds that say listen to this, it is important.

5 Presentation.

In the same way that your thesis or journal article should have a clear argument, a good presentation needs a clear message and an efficient vehicle to transmit this message in a few minutes (usually 30, maximum 45 minutes). This key message provides the focus for your presentation and gives it the structure. Having a clear message helps you to communicate more effectively and takes the focus away from merely delivering information. A visual representation of your ideas can enhance your audience’s understanding of your points, provide a point of interest and create a more lasting impact than oral input alone. You should never let your visual aids replace good content.

The structure of the thesis presentation is normally different from the research paper structure explained above and that is fine. The structure of the PowerPoint presentation can incorporate some innovative approach to help the team to explain the project more effectively, efficiently, creatively and innovatively. This innovative approach could also include some changes in the original Word document structure. The fact that you have about 30 minutes to do the final presentation represents a time constraint that you will have to overcome with a very well-designed presentation.

My recommendation is not to innovate too much in terms of formatting and animations, you should rather innovate in terms of contents and the way you communicate and explain your results better (you can always find a better way to explain things). I also normally recommend you to follow a more graphical approach and avoid writing too much text in your presentation. People listening to your presentation are not supposed to read what you are saying, it is torturing to do that. The point here is that you are supposed to design slides that can help you to explain, rather than full text slides. The ability to clearly explain a lot of work in a limited amount of time is very valuable in the job market and we normally develop this skill while doing research.

Some common mistakes in the earlier drafts of the PowerPoint presentation includes:

Excessive animations. Animations are OK if they are really necessary. My advice here is to be innovative in the way you present your work, not in the way you add animations.

Too many slides. My advice here is to keep it short or at least as short as you can. Make every slide count. Be critical here and ask yourself if that slide really adds value. Remember this is about hearing your own explanations, not watching a lengthy presentation.

Uneven distribution of slides per student. Sometimes one team member ends up explaining 50% of the whole presentation. This is not recommended as you are expected to show how you manage to work in a team, and that everybody in the team understands the project very well. So, try to distribute the explanations of slides as well as possible. One slide can be explained by two students and that is absolutely fine.

Hard to understand. The presentation is a tool to help you link and relate ideas that you will eventually develop in your explanation. Try to explain as clearly as you can as this will help your audience to follow and understand what you did. If your presentation is not helping you to explain your work properly, just edit it or change it.

Avoid small fonts by all means. People are supposed to be able to see every part and every sentence in your presentation.

Practicing is vital to ensuring good delivery because it will improve your presentation and give you confidence. It will also help you to become familiar with the pronunciation of difficult or foreign words and the visual aids and outline of the presentation. Most importantly it will help ensure that you are adhering to the time limit. Some teams decide to memorize their speech, this is something that you will have to decide and I will let you know if it is working or not. I normally prefer to hear presentations in which the author explains the contents rather than listening to a memorized speech.

During the delivery. Take a deep breath, try to remain calm and relaxed. You are prepared and in control. Look around, smile at the audience and focus on the following.

• Speaking loudly to project your voice to the whole room.
• Speaking slowly and emphasizing key points.
• Speaking clearly. Speaking with an accent does not matter, but your audience needs to be able to comprehend what you are saying.
• Speaking to your audience and maintaining good eye contact. Be careful not to talk to your notes or stare at a single point in the room throughout your talk.
• Showing enthusiasm. If you are not excited about your own talk, you cannot expect others to be interested.
• Portraying positive body language. Stand straight and relax your hands. Try not to slouch, pace up and down, etc., as this can be highly distracting for the audience.
• Keep a homogeneous format throughout your presentation slides including font size, format of figures, type of fonts, colors, etc.
• Remember the slides are not your talk; they are there to support your talk.

Be prepared to answer questions not only at the end of your talk but during it, particularly during departmental seminars. If an audience member interrupts to ask a question, answer it politely. See the question in a positive light because it shows that the audience is listening and genuinely interested.

The concern that most presenters have is what to do if asked a question they cannot answer. Do not panic and never try to bluff as the audience can see straight through it. Rather, acknowledge the value of the question in offering new avenues for your research, admit that you do not know the answer. It is unrealistic to expect that you will have expert knowledge on everything remotely related to your topic of research. However, there is a reasonable expectation that you will be able to answer more obvious questions and to support the claims that you make, including expanding upon the theoretical assumptions or empirical arguments that underlie your research.

6 What might go wrong?

Many things might go wrong, but if we know them and consider them in advance then this risk can be properly managed (or avoided). One of the main risks is that you start losing interest in your project because of your current job or any other sort of new or unanticipated responsibilities. The kind of commitment that you have with your team and your supervisor demands a constant and a high interest throughout the whole process. My recommendation in this respect is that you always keep track of this document to evaluate your progress in a timely manner and always keep me informed about your progress.

You can also get frustrated by not meeting my quality standards, or by not understanding a specific topic, or by not overcoming a specific academic challenge. I am not going to actively promote negative feelings like frustration but if it happens, then you should overcome this as well and as quickly as you can. Frustration is not good, but if you feel it then try to transform it into an extra motivation to achieve the objective. Do not let frustration paralyse your progress, and do not let it last for long. I consider there is no challenge that you cannot overcome, you just have to allocate the right amount of time and effort. Ideally, you are supposed to enjoy the process of writing your project and overcoming challenges feels good.

Incorporating comments and feedback successfully is also a challenge. Sometimes reviewers have good intentions but incorporating everything may be problematic as the following picture shows.

You could even ignore this document and that is unfortunate because this document is designed to assist you in the whole project. This document could contribute to work more efficiently, avoid potential risks, and help you to get things on the right track.

On the positive side, many other things might go well. I am confident that the negative issues can be easily and quickly be managed and you can progress well most of the time.

7 Lessons from past dissertation cohorts.

This guidance consolidates the feedback I repeatedly gave to dissertation teams in previous supervision chats in Pumble. The goal is to make the main lessons from those projects visible and reusable, so future students can avoid common problems and follow a clearer path to a strong final dissertation.

Red flags to treat as urgent.

If any of the following describes your project, act immediately. These are the patterns that repeatedly cause weak dissertations.

• We do not have a clear research question yet, or the question is still broad and vague.
• The literature review is mostly a list of papers and summaries rather than an argument that justifies our approach.
• The methodology explains what we did but does not explain why those choices answer the question.
• The dataset description contains numbers that do not match the design, and we cannot explain why.
• The results section is mainly tables and figures with description, but little interpretation or connection to the literature.
• We keep expanding scope late in the timeline instead of strengthening what we already have.
• We are close to the deadline and still making major changes to topic, dataset, or method.

The dissertation must read as one coherent argument.

A recurring issue was that students included the required sections, but the dissertation still felt fragmented. The key lesson is that the dissertation must feel like a single, continuous argument where each section prepares the next.

In practice, the reader should always be able to answer these questions without effort: What is the problem, what does the literature say and not say about it, what will you do to investigate it, what did you find, and why does it matter. If the links between sections are weak, add explicit sentences that connect them. Close the literature review by stating how it motivates your method. Open the methodology by restating what design choice you are making because of the literature.

Avoid overly complex structures that hide your main message.

Another repeated pattern was an overly complex structure. Too many short subsections can bury the argument and make the dissertation feel like disconnected fragments. This reduces clarity and makes it harder for the marker to see what you contributed.

Headings are not the problem. Fragmentation is. Use structure to help the reader follow the argument, not to break it into too many small pieces.

Write for clarity, not for sophistication.

In several drafts, the writing was grammatically good but too dense and over-complicated. When clarity is sacrificed for style, the dissertation becomes harder to evaluate and your main points become less persuasive.

Your writing should make it easy to see what you are claiming, why you are claiming it, and what evidence supports it. Clear writing is a strength in academic work, not a weakness.

Literature reviews must build justification, not just describe sources.

A common early-stage mistake is writing a literature review as a catalogue of studies. A strong literature review does more than describe what others did. It synthesises what is known, identifies what is missing or inconsistent, and uses that gap to justify your own design.

Another recurring issue was relying heavily on older sources. Classic papers can be important, but you should also show that you understand recent developments and current debates. If most sources are old or loosely connected to your question, the work looks outdated and under-informed.

Source quality matters. Avoid treating non-academic websites as authoritative references for academic claims. Use peer-reviewed work as your foundation, and only use professional or institutional reports when they are genuinely appropriate.

Methodology must show reasoning, alignment, and detail.

Across projects, one of the most frequent concerns was that methodology sections became descriptive rather than analytical. The method section is not only a list of steps. It must explain why your choices answer your research question and how they connect to the literature.

Be explicit about why you chose your variables, how constructs were measured, and why the model or design fits the question. If you say you follow a prior paper, briefly explain what that paper did and why it is relevant to your design.

Be precise about your dataset and sample. If your stated design and your stated number of observations do not match, the reader will question the integrity of your data handling. If there are missing years, an unbalanced panel, or multiple observations per unit, explain that clearly and early.

Also be careful with statistical testing and assumptions. In some settings, observations are not independent, so methods that assume independence need justification. When data structure creates noise, consider whether a cleaner structure can reduce noise and make your results easier to interpret.

Results must be explained, not only reported.

A repeated issue was results sections that describe tables and figures without explaining their meaning. Reporting outputs is not the same as analysis. Your results should directly answer your research question, and your discussion should show that you can interpret findings in relation to the literature.

If your findings differ from prior work, do not stop at general explanations such as differences in time period or sample. Investigate and state clearly what causes the difference. When possible, show how the result changes under alternative assumptions or definitions.

Be willing to refine your framing as the evidence develops. For some teams, it was helpful to let results lead the final organisation of the story, then adjust the research questions so they align with the actual evidence and conclusions.

Discussion and contribution must be explicit and evidence-based.

Markers look for contribution and value added. If the discussion becomes mainly speculative, the dissertation can appear weak even if the project topic is strong. The discussion should make clear what your evidence supports and what it does not support.

If the main finding is that an effect is weak or not significant, that can still be a contribution. The contribution is not only strong positive effects. The key is to state the conclusion clearly, explain the implication, and show that you have considered alternative explanations and limitations responsibly.

When time is short, prioritise coherence, methodological justification, and clarity of interpretation. A small number of well-chosen robustness checks can strengthen credibility and reduce the appearance of over-interpretation.

Presentation should support the argument at the point of use.

A recurring practical recommendation was to integrate tables and figures into the dissertation where you discuss them, rather than placing them far away from the argument. Readers need the evidence at the moment you make the claim.

Figures should help the reader understand the full story. If splitting visuals into separate periods prevents the reader from seeing the overall pattern, consider combining them, but only if the result remains clear and readable.

Topic selection should be ambitious but feasible.

Good topics are clear, focused, testable, and supported by data that is strong enough to sustain analysis. A risk across projects was choosing a topic that was interesting but difficult to support with the available dataset. When the evidence is thin, the project can drift into opinion rather than research.

Across all teams, the strongest work was always the work where the reader could trace a clean line from the question, to the literature gap, to the method choice, to the evidence, to the interpretation, to the contribution. If you make that chain visible throughout, you greatly improve the quality and the markability of the dissertation.

Three examples of what “good” looks like.

These examples show the difference between common weak patterns and the standard you should aim for. They are not the only valid way to write, but they illustrate the level of clarity and reasoning expected.

Example 1: Research question clarity.

Weak pattern: “Does X affect Y?”
Why it is weak: It does not define context, measurement, or what would count as an answer.
Stronger pattern: “In the context of Z, is X associated with Y when Y is measured as [definition], controlling for [key factors], over the period [time window]?”
Why it is stronger: It narrows scope and implies a feasible design.

Example 2: Literature review paragraph.

Weak pattern: “Paper A studied X. Paper B studied Y. Paper C studied Z.”
Why it is weak: It summarises papers without building an argument for your design.
Stronger pattern: “Prior studies generally find [main pattern]. However, evidence is mixed in [specific context] because [reason]. This matters for our dissertation because it motivates our focus on [your design choice], and it justifies measuring X using [your measure] rather than [alternative].”
Why it is stronger: It synthesises and leads directly into your methodology.

Example 3: Results paragraph.

Weak pattern: “Table 2 shows the regression results. X is positive and significant.”
Why it is weak: It does not explain meaning, magnitude, or relation to the research question.
Stronger pattern: “The main result is that X is associated with higher Y. The estimated effect is [magnitude], and it remains similar under [one robustness variation]. This supports our research question because it suggests [interpretation]. Compared with prior studies, the direction is consistent, but the magnitude differs, likely because [specific difference we can defend].”
Why it is stronger: It links evidence to interpretation and to the literature.

8 Checklist.

Below you can find a useful checklist to bear in mind while working on your thesis project.

1. Keep me informed about progress regularly, even when progress is slow.
2. Make sure you are clear about what you are expected to do in the short run and in the medium run. This guide can shed some light about this.
3. When you receive feedback, confirm what you understood and list the concrete edits you will make.
4. If you need clarification, ask quickly and with a specific question. Do not guess and hope it is correct.
5. If I take longer than expected to respond or review a draft, remind me politely.
6. Do not wait passively for instructions. Propose your next steps and deadlines.
7. Keep quality standards high throughout. Do not leave editing, checking, and polishing to the last days.
8. Read this document on a regular basis as a guide and reference. You are expected to be able to achieve some sort of independence by following this guide closely.
9. Never get frustrated because there will be no challenge that you can overcome with the right amount of time and effort. If after all you get frustrated, upset, or angry do not let it happen too frequently and do not let it last for long.
10. Follow number 1.

9 Conclusion.

I hope you find this process a rewarding learning experience for you. Remember that part of my time, my knowledge, interest, and experience are currently at your service.

◼︎ ◼︎︎ ◼︎ ◼︎ ◼◼︎ ◼︎ ◼

10 UDEM: PEF.

El desarrollo de una tesis, un proyecto de investigación o un PEF como requisito para obtener un grado de licenciatura en el área de negocios es crucial por varias razones. En primer lugar, la elaboración de una tesis brinda a los estudiantes la oportunidad de adquirir, aplicar y perfeccionar sus habilidades de investigación, incidiendo en la importancia del método científico en su preparación profesional. Este enfoque estructurado no solo contribuye a la rigurosidad académica, sino que también inculca la capacidad de abordar problemas empresariales de manera sistemática y eficiente.

Además, el proceso de elaborar una tesis implica la identificación y análisis profundo de problemas relevantes en el ámbito empresarial. Al enfrentarse a estos desafíos, los estudiantes adquieren una comprensión más profunda de la industria, mejoran sus habilidades analíticas y desarrollan la capacidad de proponer soluciones innovadoras a problemas que existen y a problemas que apenas se están gestando.

La tesis también fomenta el pensamiento crítico y la habilidad para sintetizar información, aspectos esenciales en el mundo empresarial. Al finalizar este proyecto, los estudiantes habrán demostrado no solo su conocimiento teórico sino también su capacidad para aplicar conceptos en situaciones prácticas. En resumen, la elaboración de una tesis en el área de negocios no solo es un requisito académico, sino un proceso formativo que potencia habilidades de investigación, fomenta el pensamiento crítico y prepara a los futuros profesionales para abordar problemas empresariales de manera más eficiente y efectiva.

En la UDEM, los estudiantes desarrollan su proyecto PEF en sus últimos dos semestres de sus estudios profesionales. En el penúltimo cursan PEF1 con el objetivo de proponer y obtener la aprobación de su proyecto; y en el último semestre PEF2 con el objetivo de desarrollar el proyecto y obtener la aprobación final. Entonces, aunque ambas sean dos materias, PEF1 y PEF2 se consideran como un solo bloque. Esto tiene implicaciones relevantes porque si un alumno reprueba PEF1, no tendrá derecho a continuar en PEF2 sino que debe cursar de nuevo PEF1 antes de cursar PEF2. De la misma manera, si un alumno reprueba PEF2, deberá cursar de nuevo PEF1 para preparar un proyecto nuevo y luego cursar PEF2 para implementarlo.

Los entregables en este curso se realizarán en Quarto o en MS-Word, dependiendo de las habilidades e intereses del equipo. MS-Word es bien conocido. Quarto ofrece funcionalidades avanzadas que optimizan la gestión de información, secciones, referencias y la presentación de datos complejos. Su capacidad para integrar datos dinámicos, gráficos y análisis en el documento mismo mejora la visualización de información. Además, la automatización de tareas repetitivas y la eficiencia en la creación y edición de documentos permiten un flujo de trabajo más rápido y preciso. En un entorno empresarial competitivo, la superioridad de Quarto no solo aumenta la productividad, sino que también contribuye a una toma de decisiones informada y a la generación de documentos de alta calidad, destacando así la profesionalidad y eficacia del equipo.

10.1 UDEM: PEF1 o MIN.

Bienvenidos a PEF1 o a Métodos de Investigación en Negocios (MIN). Este grupo es exclusivo para LFI, aunque algunas otras carreras lo pueden cursar con la autorización de la dirección de carrera y/o departamento académico. Usaré MIN o PEF1 de manera indistinta para referirme a este curso. Una vez que su anteproyecto de PEF1 esté terminado después de segundos parciales, y que sea aprobado por un comité de profesores al final de este semestre, ustedes cursarán PEF2 el siguiente semestre, que es el periodo en donde trabajan exclusivamente con su supervisor y que culmina con la presentación final de su proyecto PEF en el semestre de su graduación.

Antes de iniciar con PEF1, es importante verificar que el siguiente semestre sea el último de tus estudios profesionales, si no es así entonces debes contactar a la dirección de carrera porque seguramente no debas estar inscrito en este grupo este semestre. En particular, debes confirmar que actualmente te faltan seis materias o menos para completar tu plan de estudios.

Mi nombre es Dr. Martín Lozano <martin.lozano@udem.edu> y soy el profesor asignado a la clase de MIN. También superviso equipos de PEF principalmente pero no exclusivamente para las carreras de economía y finanzas, con lo cual es posible que para algunos de ustedes sea profesor de MIN y además supervisor de su proyecto PEF en este semestre y el siguiente semestre en PEF2. En caso de que tengas interés en que yo supervise tu proyecto PEF, puedes contactarme.

Una vez que esté verificado que pertenezcas a este grupo, lo siguiente que debes hacer en las primeras dos semanas de PEF1 es formar un equipo de cuatro personas con quienes harás el proyecto PEF. En caso de que no se completen los equipos, la dirección de carrera y/o departamento académico evaluarán y en su caso autorizarán equipos con otras carreras o un número de integrantes distinto. Esta es una de las primeras actividades prioritarias que se deben completar este semestre en PEF1. Resultaría muy problemático si algún alumno no tiene equipo al inicio de la tercera semana porque no podría cumplir con las entregas requeridas en la clase.

Cuando el equipo esté completo, deben conseguir a un supervisor que pueda y que esté interesado en asesorar su proyecto. En concreto, deben buscar y contactar a un profesor del departamento académico de finanzas que esté interesado en su tema y que pueda supervisar su proyecto de PEF dada su carga académica. Administrativamente, el supervisor (o también llamado asesor) se incorpora al equipo hasta que el anteproyecto de PEF1 esté aprobado por un comité de profesores, lo que sucede al final de PEF1, pero en ocasiones su supervisor puede decidir participar activamente desde PEF1. Recomiendo que al abordar a su potencial supervisor de PEF ustedes ya tengan una idea sobre el proyecto que quieren hacer. Eso facilitaría el proceso de búsqueda de supervisor.

En concreto, lo que recomiendo es que tengan una plática como la siguiente: “Profesor, cursamos PEF1 y estamos interesados en que usted sea nuestro supervisor, queremos hacer nuestro anteproyecto sobre …, en caso de que sí pueda, nos gustaría saber si puede tener reuniones sobre nuestros avances durante este semestre que cursamos PEF1 o si prefiere que lo contactemos de nuevo cuando esté aprobado nuestro anteproyecto…” Lo ideal es que puedan confirmar su asesor en la tercera semana de PEF1 o antes.

Tener un asesor para PEF2 y un profesor en MIN puede ser confuso. Deben saber que las actividades de MIN las califico yo (Dr. Martín Lozano) como profesor de MIN este semestre y un comité evaluador formado por profesores del departamento de finanzas después de concluir los segundos parciales; y sus avances en PEF2 del siguiente semestre lo calificará su supervisor de PEF con el apoyo de un par de sinodales al final del semestre en el que cursen PEF2.

El objetivo principal de MIN es ayudar a los equipos a que tengan una propuesta de PEF o anteproyecto tan sólida, clara e interesante, que el comité de profesores no tenga duda en aprobarla y así el equipo pueda continuar con PEF2 el siguiente semestre. Para lograr el objetivo, tenemos actividades en el curso de MIN, y retroalimentación sobre la velocidad y calidad de sus avances. En general, la calidad del proyecto depende de la organización y el tiempo invertido por el equipo. En el caso en el que el equipo repruebe PEF1 no es porque el curso sea complicado sino porque por alguna razón el equipo no pudo cumplir con la calidad requerida en sus avances.

Las actividades de MIN no son independientes. Esto significa que se requiere completar la primera para continuar con la segunda y así sucesivamente. Incluso una entrega puede incluir correcciones sobre las entregas anteriores. Su proyecto, entregas y presentaciones en MIN pueden ser en español o inglés, sugiero que eso lo consulten en su equipo y lo acuerden con su supervisor de PEF2. En MIN no tenemos políticas sobre entregas tardías porque las actividades son responsabilidad del equipo, y si no se entregan a tiempo se califica con cero. Como en otras clases de la misma frecuencia, el número de faltas máximo permitido de acuerdo al reglamento de estudiantes es 2.

Completar una propuesta de investigación que sea aprobada por un comité de profesores no es sencillo porque a pesar de que los criterios de evaluación son los mismos y están disponibles para profesores y estudiantes, los profesores pueden tener visiones e interpretaciones distintas sobre los proyectos. Eso significa que para un profesor un criterio puede determinar la calificación de manera significativa mientras que para otro profesor no representa un problema muy grave. Por esta razón, la retroalimentación que yo haga a sus actividades durante clase están orientadas a ayudarlos a comprender los criterios de evaluación del comité de profesores. Los comentarios que ustedes reciban sobre sus actividades deben ayudarlos a ajustar sus criterios y alinearlos con los criterios del comité de profesores. En este sentido, los comentarios que haga a un equipo pueden servir de guía a otros equipos. Recibir comentarios negativos puede resultar frustrante, pero no deben tomarlos como una crítica destructiva. En MIN estamos colaborando, no compitiendo, estamos en paz, no en conflicto.

Transición de PEF1 a PEF2.

• En el momento en que su anteproyecto de PEF1 esté autorizado al final del semestre, pueden comenzar a trabajar con su supervisor de PEF2.
• En PEF2 deben contactar a su supervisor para notificarle que su anteproyecto ha sido aprobado y para organizar la forma de trabajo durante PEF2.
• Se espera que su proyecto PEF sea una continuación de su trabajo en PEF1.
• Su supervisor les informará sobre los lineamientos de PEF2.

10.2 UDEM: PEF2.

Esta sección es exclusiva para aquellos equipos que hayan decidido que yo sea su supervisor de su proyecto PEF. Cada supervisor tiene una forma distinta de trabajar, con lo cual esta sección no debe considerarse como lineamientos generales.

Hay dos eventos que definen el semestre de PEF2. El primero es la presentación de medio término. El segundo es la presentación final. Ambas son presentaciones presenciales en la UDEM.

Presentación de medio término.

La presentación de medio término es una oportunidad para que el equipo presente los avances de su trabajo a dos sinodales y a mí. Esta presentación la programo de acuerdo con la disponibilidad de los sinodales antes de reportar calificaciones del segundo parcial. Esto significa que la presentación de medio término determina su calificación del segundo parcial y es una evaluación conjunta entre sinodales y yo. Tan pronto confirme su disponibilidad, anuncio la fecha al equipo.

Separo una sala por una hora. El equipo hace una presentación de 20 a 25 minutos y el resto del tiempo se utiliza para preguntas, comentarios y retroalimentación por parte de los sinodales. El equipo debe registrar las inquietudes y recomendaciones con el objetivo de considerarlas e implementarlas en el proyecto. En esta presentación no tenemos un criterio de vestimenta, con lo cual el equipo puede acudir con vestimenta casual.

Procuro que los sinodales no tengan antecedentes del proyecto. El objetivo es evaluar qué tan bien puede el equipo comunicar su trabajo a sinodales que no conocen el tema de antemano. Sugiero que el equipo lleve un par de tabletas con la presentación cargada, de tal forma que los sinodales puedan seguir la exposición con mayor facilidad.

Al inicio de la presentación agradezco la presencia de los sinodales y les indico que pueden interrumpir la presentación en cualquier momento para hacer preguntas o solicitar aclaraciones. Al final, les doy nuevamente la palabra para que compartan comentarios finales, conclusiones o recomendaciones sobre el estado del proyecto.

En términos prácticos, el proyecto debe estar en una etapa avanzada al momento de la presentación de medio término. Esto implica avances significativos durante el primer y segundo parcial. Los avances se reflejan tanto en el documento final como en la presentación de medio término. Este evento es crítico porque los sinodales crean expectativas sobre la entrega final a partir de lo que observan en medio término. Por esta razón, tendremos ensayos previos. El equipo tiene la obligación de agendar al menos un ensayo previo a la presentación de medio término y al menos un ensayo previo a la presentación final.

Entre medio término y la presentación final.

El periodo entre el final de la presentación de medio término y la presentación final se dedica a incorporar la retroalimentación y comentarios de los sinodales, además de los requerimientos propios del proyecto. La idea es que en la presentación final los sinodales puedan ver claramente que sus comentarios han sido escuchados y que han sido implementados.

Es importante que el equipo no acuda a los sinodales para revisión de avances. Los avances del proyecto se revisan únicamente conmigo como su supervisor. La interacción del equipo con los sinodales se limita a la presentación de medio término y a la presentación final.

Entrega previa a la presentación final.

Antes de la presentación final, el equipo debe entregar el documento a biblioteca y enviarlo también a mi correo, para que yo pueda compartirlo con los sinodales una semana antes de la presentación final. Las indicaciones detalladas sobre el documento de tesis están explicadas en las primeras 9 secciones de este documento.

Presentación final.

La presentación final es el evento en el que el equipo presenta el proyecto terminado a los sinodales y a mí. La UDEM abre un periodo de dos semanas para programar las presentaciones finales, pero en mi caso las programo en la primera semana, de acuerdo con la disponibilidad de los sinodales. En cuanto tenga la fecha confirmada, haré las reservas correspondientes para que el equipo tenga un espacio disponible para el toque de campana.

El evento completo dura 1.5 horas. El equipo presenta su proyecto durante 25 a 30 minutos. Inmediatamente después, tenemos una sesión de preguntas y respuestas de 20 a 25 minutos con los sinodales. Al igual que en la presentación de medio término, recomiendo que el equipo lleve un par de tabletas con la presentación cargada para los sinodales. Normalmente sugiero que la presentación dedique relativamente más tiempo a los resultados, dado que los sinodales ya tienen antecedentes sobre el proyecto por la presentación de medio término y por el documento que recibieron antes de la presentación final.

Al final de la sesión de preguntas y respuestas, pedimos al equipo que salga de la sala por unos momentos para que los sinodales y yo podamos completar las actas de disertación. Esto suele tomar entre 5 y 10 minutos. Después de esto, llamo de nuevo al equipo y a las personas que los acompañan, incluyendo familiares y amigos. Una vez que estemos todos en la sala, me presento, agradezco la presencia de familiares y amigos, y agradezco también a los sinodales.

En esta parte del evento tomo protesta al equipo, leo las actas de disertación y leo vox veritatis. Después, los sinodales y yo damos un mensaje a los graduados y a sus invitados, y los invitamos a que acudan al toque de campana. Con esto concluye el evento de la presentación final.

Una vez que terminemos con la presentación final, me despediré del equipo. El equipo se dirige al toque de campana, y normalmente los sinodales y yo nos quedamos en la sala para atender a otro equipo.

This document took 3.55 seconds to compile in Quarto version 1.5.54, and R version 4.4.1 (2024-06-14 ucrt).

11 UDEM: Calendario MIN.

MIN, Primavera 2026. Salón 3310, Jueves 19:00 – 22:00. Zoom URL para unirse: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82399571470

11.1 Part 1.

Session 1. Thursday, January 15.

• Bienvenida.
• ¿Tienes equipo, tema y asesor(a)?
• Tema: Tipos de tesis, su estructura y expectativas sobre su trabajo PEF.
• Mensaje: El tema de tu tesis no se define en una lluvia de ideas, sino que surge revisando la literatura, con la ayuda de Google Scholar, ChatGPT y tu profesor.
• Tema: Uso de Google Scholar en la definición del tema y bases de datos.
• Si tienes interés en una licencia de DataCamp para este semestre envíame un email para dártela.
• Al menos durante este semestre es necesario que te suscribas al canal de YouTube ahyaentendi

Session 2. Thursday, January 22.

• Actividad: Confirmar si te faltan seis materias o menos para completar su plan de estudios.
• Actividad: Reportar avances en la formación de equipos, definición del tema y asignación de asesor(a).
• Tema: Tecnologías para la producción de documentos científicos.
• Actividad opcional: Instalar R, RStudio, ¿cómo producir documentos PDF en Quarto? Siga estas instrucciones de Wei Miao para instalar los programas en tu computadora: Instrucciones escritas. Aquí están las mismas instrucciones explicadas por Wei Miao en un video: Instrucciones en video.
• Tema: Temas de investigación en finanzas.
• Actividad: Discusión de video. Finding Research Topics - Robert Marquez
• Sugiero que se registren a los seminarios IVRSiF y JARS. The Finance Research Consortium (FRC) is a research collaboration launched in September 2020 by four institutions: University of Aalborg Business School (Denmark), BAFFI CAREFIN Centre at Bocconi University (Italy), University of Rome - Sapienza (Italy) and the Centre for Governance, Regulation and Industrial Strategy, University of Bath (UK). The initial seminar series established by the FRC, the International Virtual Research Seminar in Finance (IVRSiF), developed into two initiatives, the International Research Seminars (IReS) in Finance, and the Junior Academics Research Seminars (JARS) in Finance. Both seminar series are open to all academics and PhD students.

Session 3, . Thursday, January 29.

• Obligatorio. Acepta las normativas del trabajo en equipo para esta clase: Formulario.
• Obligatorio. Imprimir, firmar y entregar en clase las “Políticas para el Desarrollo de Proyecto de Evaluación Final (PEF)”. Este documento está disponible en Blackboard.
• Tarea 1: Entregar documento PDF con: (1) la confirmación de miembros de equipos, tema y asesor, (2) reporte de los objetivos de su proyecto. Estos pueden ser de uno a dos objetivos generales, con dos a tres objetivos específicos por cada objetivo general. El documento no debería exceder una página. La entrega es por Blackboard, una entrega por equipo. La hora límite es 7:00pm de la sesión 3. Ponderación 5% de la calificación final.
• Actividad: Retroalimentación de la tarea 1.
• Tema: ¿Cómo presentar tu proyecto de investigación?
• Tema: La estructura del documento de tesis: Chapter 3.
• Actividad: Discusión de video. https://www.fma.org/virtual-seminar
• Actividad: Discusión de video. https://www.fma.org/student-virtual-seminar
• Videos de PEF1, primavera 2020: Eq1, Eq2, Eq3, Eq4.
• Videos de PEF1, primavera 2024: Eq1, Eq2, Eq3, Eq4, Eq5, Eq6, Eq7.
• Videos de PEF1, otoño 2024: Eq1, Eq2, Eq3.
• Videos de PEF1, primavera 2025: Eq1, Eq2, Eq3, Eq4, Eq5.
• Videos de PEF1, otoño 2025: Eq1, Eq2, Eq3, Eq4, Eq5, Eq6, Eq7, Eq8.

Session 4. Thursday, February 5.

• Tarea 2: Entregar documento PDF con el draft de la revisión literaria. Una entrega por equipo. La entrega es por Blackboard, una entrega por equipo. La hora límite es 7:00pm de la sesión 4. Ponderación 5% de la calificación final, en total se acumula 10%. El documento debe ser el mismo que el de la tarea 1, solo incluyan una nueva sección con el draft de la revisión literaria.
• Actividad: Retroalimentación de la tarea 2.
• Actividad: Discusión de video. Effective data storytelling for financial services.

Session 5. Thursday, February 12.

• Tarea 3: Entregar documento PDF con revisión literaria y metodología. Una entrega por equipo. La entrega es por Blackboard, una entrega por equipo. La hora límite es 7:00pm de la sesión 5. Ponderación 5% de la calificación final, en total se acumula 15%. El documento debe ser el mismo que el de la tarea 2, solo incluyan la nueva sección y correcciones pertinentes.
• Actividad: Recibir retroalimentación de la tarea 3.
• No conozco la fecha límite, pero deben completar la encuesta avanza 180 por favor.

11.2 Part 2.

Session 6. Thursday, February 19.

• Tarea 4: Entregar documento PDF con introducción, revisión literaria y metodología. Una entrega por equipo. La entrega es por Blackboard, una entrega por equipo. La hora límite es 7:00pm de la sesión 6. Ponderación 5% de la calificación final, en total se acumula 20%. El documento debe ser el mismo que el de la tarea 3, solo incluyan la nueva sección y correcciones pertinentes.
• Actividad: Recibir retroalimentación de la tarea 4.
• Actividad: Completar coevaluación 1. Las coevaluaciones funcionan como en el resto de clases que imparto, pueden ver las instrucciones en el siguiente enlace https://mlozanoqf.github.io/ARF1/#co-evaluation. El enlace estará disponible en Blackboard en la sección “entregas”. La hora límite es 7:00pm de la sesión 6.
• Reporte de calificaciones primer parcial.
• No conozco la fecha límite, pero deben completar la encuesta avanza 180 por favor.

Session 7. Thursday, February 26.

• Tarea 5: Entregar la tarea 4 con comentarios y un enlace de YouTube con un elevator pitch. Una entrega por equipo. La entrega es por Blackboard, una entrega por equipo. La hora límite es 7:00pm de la sesión 7. Ponderación 10% de la calificación final, en total se acumula 30%. El documento debe ser el mismo que el de la tarea 4. Identifiquen claramente los cambios y mejoras que incorporaron en la primera página. El elevator pitch es una grabación de su presentación de máximo 2 minutos en donde todos los miembros del equipo participan para explicar su proyecto. La grabación es sin apoyos visuales.
• Ejemplo de un elevator pitch: PhD elevator pitch presentation by Fabienne Cheung
• Actividad: Recibir retroalimentación de la tarea 4.
• Tema: Habilidades para presentación.
• Actividad: Discusión de video. Academic skills - presenting effectively - Part 1
• Actividad: Discusión de video. Academic skills - presenting effectively - Part 2

Session 8. Thursday, March 5.

• Tarea 6: Presentar en clase introducción, literatura y metodología. Presentaciones con apoyos visuales. Máximo 15 minutos por equipo. No hay entrega por Blackboard. Ponderación 10% de la calificación final, en total se acumula 40%.
• Actividad: Recibir retroalimentación de la tarea 6.
• Actividad: Revisar la rúbrica de la entrega final.

Session 9. Thursday, March 12.

• Tarea 7: Presentar en clase anteproyecto para alumnos y/o público externo. Presentaciones con apoyos visuales en clase. Máximo 15 minutos por equipo. No hay entrega por Blackboard. Ponderación 15% de la calificación final, en total se acumula 55%.

Session 10. Thursday, March 19.

• Tarea 8: Presentar en clase anteproyecto con comentarios. Presentaciones con apoyos visuales en clase. Máximo 15 minutos por equipo. Ponderación 15% de la calificación final, en total se acumula 70%.
• Actividad: Recibir retroalimentación de la tarea 8.

Session 11. Thursday, March 26.

• No hay sesión presencial ni por Zoom.
• Actividad: Hacer las grabaciones de las presentaciones. Aprovechen que todos tienen tiempo libre al menos de 7:00pm a 10:00pm para hacerlo.
• Actividad: Completar coevaluación 2. Las coevaluaciones funcionan como en el resto de clases que imparto, pueden ver las instrucciones en el siguiente enlace https://mlozanoqf.github.io/ARF1/#co-evaluation. El enlace estará disponible en Blackboard en la sección “entregas”. La hora límite es 7:00pm de la sesión 11.
• Reporte de calificaciones segundo parcial.

11.3 Part 3.

Holiday. Thursday, April 2.

Session 12. Thursday, April 9.

• No hay sesión presencial ni por Zoom.
• Actividad: Hacer las grabaciones de las presentaciones. Aprovechen que todos tienen tiempo libre al menos de 7:00pm a 10:00pm para hacerlo.

Session 13. Thursday, April 16.

• No hay sesión presencial ni por Zoom.
• Tarea 9: Entrega de enlace de videos de YouTube. Una entrega por equipo. La entrega es por Blackboard. La hora límite es 7:00pm de la sesión 13. Ponderación 30% de la calificación final, en total se acumula 100%. El documento debe ser el mismo que el de la tarea 5, solo incluyan el enlace del video de la presentación final en YouTube y correcciones pertinentes. Incluyan los apoyos visuales usados en la presentación.

Session 14. Thursday, April 23.

• No hay sesión presencial ni por Zoom.
• Revisión de videos.
• Revisión de los los videos por parte de los profesores del departamento, del lunes 20 de abril al miércoles 29 de abril a las 6:00pm.
• No conozco la fecha límite, pero deben completar la encuesta avanza 360 por favor.

Session 15. Thursday, April 30.

• No hay sesión presencial ni por Zoom.
• Entrega de calificaciones: 70 puntos de tareas más 30 de evaluación del video de presentación final por parte del comité de profesores evaluadores.

11.4 The end.

Session 16. Thursday, May 7.

• No hay sesión presencial ni por Zoom.
• Presentaciones en caso de reprobar la clase.
• Farewell .

◼︎ ◼︎︎ ◼︎ ◼︎ ◼◼︎ ◼︎

12 UDEM: Calendario PEF2.

Esta sección es exclusiva para aquellos equipos que hayan decidido que yo sea su supervisor de su proyecto PEF. Cada supervisor tiene una forma distinta de trabajar, con lo cual esta sección no debe considerarse como lineamientos generales. En PEF2 no tenemos sesiones como en un curso regular. El calendario no incluye juntas, ni otras actividades necesarias que no es posible anticipar.

12.1 Part 1.

Week 1. Mon-Fri, Jan 12-16.

• Reading. Course syllabus (this document).
• Junta inicial para determinar los siguientes pasos.
• Si tienes interés en una licencia de DataCamp para este semestre envíame un email para dártela.
• Al menos durante este semestre es necesario que te suscribas al canal de YouTube ahyaentendi

Week 2. Mon-Fri, Jan 19-23.

• Martín: Invitar a dos sinodales.
• Los equipos deben imprimir y firmar tres documentos que reciben por Pumble. Son políticas, lineamientos y carta compromiso. Pueden dejarlos en mi oficina, en caso de que esté cerrada pueden dejarla por debajo de la puerta. Otra alternativa es entregarlo en mi clase de PEF1, salón 3310, jueves 22, 19:00.

Week 3. Mon-Fri, Jan 26-30.

• Martín: Determinar las fechas de las presentaciones de medio término y la presentación final de acuerdo a la disponibilidad de horario de los sinodales.
• Martín: Reserva de salas para las presentaciones de medio término y la final.
• Martín: Reserva de la hora en la que van a pasar a la campana.

Week 4. Mon-Fri, Feb 2-6.

• Continua el avance regular por parte del equipo.
• Existen rúbricas y lineamientos para optar por la mención de excelencia. Sugiero que el equipo me solicite esos documentos.

Week 5. Mon-Fri, Feb 9-13.

• No conozco la fecha límite, pero deben completar la encuesta avanza 180 por favor.
• Continua el avance regular por parte del equipo.

Week 6. Mon-Fri, Feb 16-20.

• Continua el avance regular por parte del equipo.

Week 7. Mon-Fri, Feb 23-27.

• Entrega 1. La definición de la entrega depende de cada proyecto. Lo que es seguro es que deben entregar un avance sobre los resultados.
• Si el equipo lo solicita, podemos tener una coevaluación en el primer parcial.
• Reporte de calificaciones del primer parcial.

12.2 Part 2.

Week 8. Mon-Fri, Mar 2-6.

• Continua el avance regular por parte del equipo.

Week 9. Mon-Fri, Mar 9-13.

• Continua el avance regular por parte del equipo.

Week 10. Mon-Fri, Mar 16-20.

• Ensayos de presentaciones de medio término.

Week 11. Mon-Fri, Mar 23-27.

• Presentaciones de medio término.
• Si el equipo lo solicita, podemos tener una coevaluación en el segundo parcial.
• Reporte de calificaciones del segundo parcial.

12.3 Part 3.

Holiday. Mon-Fri, Mar 30-Apr 3.

Week 12. Mon-Fri, Apr 6-10.

• Junta posterior a la presentación de medio término para determinar los siguientes pasos.

Week 13. Mon-Fri, Apr 13-17.

• Continua el avance regular por parte del equipo.

Week 14. Mon-Fri, Apr 20-24.

• Continua el avance regular por parte del equipo.
• No conozco la fecha límite, pero deben completar la encuesta avanza 360 por favor.

Week 15. Mon-Fri, Apr 27-May 1.

• Ensayos de presentaciones finales.

Week 16. Mon-Fri, May 4-8.

• Registro del proyecto en Biblioteca. Los detalles se encuentran en la página electrónica de la biblioteca https://udem.libguides.com/c.php?g=1142125 Es importante que lo hagan con tiempo porque van a requerir recolectar firmas.
• Entrega del documento PEF por correo electrónico.

Week 17. Mon-Fri, May 11-15.

• Presentaciones finales.
• Farewell .

References.

Fama, Eugene F, and Kenneth R French. 1993. “Common Risk Factors in the Returns on Stocks and Bonds.” Journal of Financial Economics 33 (1): 3–56.

Lozano, Martín. 2024a. Credit Risk with R. GitHub Pages. https://mlozanoqf.github.io/tutorial_arf/.

———. 2024b. Financial Modeling in R. GitHub Pages. https://mlozanoqf.github.io/tutorial_pmf/.

———. 2024c. Forecasting with R. GitHub Pages. https://mlozanoqf.github.io/tutorial_emf/.

———. 2024d. Options and VaR with R. GitHub Pages. https://mlozanoqf.github.io/tutorial_if/.

Nash, John. 1951. “Non-Cooperative Games.” Annals of Mathematics, 286–95.