Bayesian Option Pricing Using Mixed Normal Heteroskedasticity Models
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Option pricing using mixed normal heteroscedasticity models is considered. It is explained how to perform inference and price options in a Bayesian framework. The approach allows to easily compute risk neutral predictive price densities which take into account parameter uncertainty. In an application to the S&P 500 index, classical and Bayesian inference is performed on the mixture model using the available return data. Comparing the ML estimates and posterior moments small differences are found. When pricing a rich sample of options on the index, both methods yield similar pricing errors measured in dollar and implied standard deviation losses, and it turns out that the impact of parameter uncertainty is minor. Therefore, when it comes to option pricing where large amounts of data are available, the choice of the inference method is unimportant. The results are robust to different specifications of the variance dynamics but show however that there might be scope for using Bayesian methods when considerably less data is available for inference.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it