• Journal of dental hygiene science
• /
• v.17 no.6
• /
• pp.523-532
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study was to provide basic data to standardize the clinical dental hygiene curriculum, based on analysis of current clinical dental hygiene curricula in Korea. We emailed questionnaires to 12 schools to investigate clinical dental hygiene curricula, from February to March, 2017. We analyzed the clinical dental hygiene curricula in 5 schools with a 3-year program and in 7 schools with a 4-year program. The questionnaire comprised nine items on topics relating to clinical dental hygiene, and four items relating to the dental hygiene process and oral prophylaxis. The questionnaire included details regarding the subject name, the grade/semester/credit system, course content and class hours, the number of senior professors, and the number of patients available for dental hygiene clinical training purposes. In total, there were 96 topics listed in the curricula relating to clinical dental hygiene training, and topics varied between the schools. There was an average of 20.4 topic credits, and more credits and hours were allocated to the 4-year program than to the 3-year program. On average, the ratio of students to professors was 21.4:1. Course content included infection control, concepts for dental hygiene processes, dental hygiene assessment, intervention and evaluation, case studies, and periodontal instrumentation. An average of 2 hours per patient was spent on dental hygiene practice, with an average of 1.9 visits. On average, student clinical training involved 19 patients and 26.6 patients in the 3-year and 4-year programs, respectively. The average participation time per student per topic was 38.0 hours and 53.1 hours, in the 3-year and 4-year programs, respectively. Standardizing the clinical dental hygiene curricula in Korea will require consensus guidelines on topics, the number of classes required to achieve core competencies as a dental hygienist, and theory and practice time.

• Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems
• /
• v.25 no.2
• /
• pp.39-55
• /
• 2019

Recently banks and large financial institutions have introduced lots of Robo-Advisor products. Robo-Advisor is a Robot to produce the optimal asset allocation portfolio for investors by using the financial engineering algorithms without any human intervention. Since the first introduction in Wall Street in 2008, the market size has grown to 60 billion dollars and is expected to expand to 2,000 billion dollars by 2020. Since Robo-Advisor algorithms suggest asset allocation output to investors, mathematical or statistical asset allocation strategies are applied. Mean variance optimization model developed by Markowitz is the typical asset allocation model. The model is a simple but quite intuitive portfolio strategy. For example, assets are allocated in order to minimize the risk on the portfolio while maximizing the expected return on the portfolio using optimization techniques. Despite its theoretical background, both academics and practitioners find that the standard mean variance optimization portfolio is very sensitive to the expected returns calculated by past price data. Corner solutions are often found to be allocated only to a few assets. The Black-Litterman Optimization model overcomes these problems by choosing a neutral Capital Asset Pricing Model equilibrium point. Implied equilibrium returns of each asset are derived from equilibrium market portfolio through reverse optimization. The Black-Litterman model uses a Bayesian approach to combine the subjective views on the price forecast of one or more assets with implied equilibrium returns, resulting a new estimates of risk and expected returns. These new estimates can produce optimal portfolio by the well-known Markowitz mean-variance optimization algorithm. If the investor does not have any views on his asset classes, the Black-Litterman optimization model produce the same portfolio as the market portfolio. What if the subjective views are incorrect? A survey on reports of stocks performance recommended by securities analysts show very poor results. Therefore the incorrect views combined with implied equilibrium returns may produce very poor portfolio output to the Black-Litterman model users. This paper suggests an objective investor views model based on Support Vector Machines(SVM), which have showed good performance results in stock price forecasting. SVM is a discriminative classifier defined by a separating hyper plane. The linear, radial basis and polynomial kernel functions are used to learn the hyper planes. Input variables for the SVM are returns, standard deviations, Stochastics %K and price parity degree for each asset class. SVM output returns expected stock price movements and their probabilities, which are used as input variables in the intelligent views model. The stock price movements are categorized by three phases; down, neutral and up. The expected stock returns make P matrix and their probability results are used in Q matrix. Implied equilibrium returns vector is combined with the intelligent views matrix, resulting the Black-Litterman optimal portfolio. For comparisons, Markowitz mean-variance optimization model and risk parity model are used. The value weighted market portfolio and equal weighted market portfolio are used as benchmark indexes. We collect the 8 KOSPI 200 sector indexes from January 2008 to December 2018 including 132 monthly index values. Training period is from 2008 to 2015 and testing period is from 2016 to 2018. Our suggested intelligent view model combined with implied equilibrium returns produced the optimal Black-Litterman portfolio. The out of sample period portfolio showed better performance compared with the well-known Markowitz mean-variance optimization portfolio, risk parity portfolio and market portfolio. The total return from 3 year-period Black-Litterman portfolio records 6.4%, which is the highest value. The maximum draw down is -20.8%, which is also the lowest value. Sharpe Ratio shows the highest value, 0.17. It measures the return to risk ratio. Overall, our suggested view model shows the possibility of replacing subjective analysts's views with objective view model for practitioners to apply the Robo-Advisor asset allocation algorithms in the real trading fields.