这是文章第三页。
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/17-03/wp_quant?currentPage=3

不知道是不是记者的渲染，这事情看着很荒唐：

Li's breakthrough was that instead of waiting to assemble enough historical data about actual defaults, which are rare in the real world, he used historical prices from the CDS market. It's hard to build a historical model to predict Alice's or Britney's behavior, but anybody could see whether the price of credit default swaps on Britney tended to move in the same direction as that on Alice. If it did, then there was a strong correlation between Alice's and Britney's default risks, as priced by the market.

顶级的大金融公司的真的会把现实问题看的这么简单？他们早都知道任何关联都可能是巧合。而且，即使模型是正确的，也存在规避风险这样行为经济学的问题（不了解，瞎侃http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_finance）

所以，与其相信是那个模型惹的祸，还不如相信是由于交易员和投资者利益不一致造成的。

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/11/opinion/11wilmott.html