Nature‐inspired soft computing for financial option pricing using high‐performance analytics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary High‐performance computing has witnessed the push towards computer hardware design in the past decade. Many real world problems are both data and compute intensive. Designing efficient algorithms is important to make effective use of the hardware resources for fast data analysis. Finance is one application that will benefit from these supercomputers. Options are instruments that give opportunity to profit from market movements without making large investments. However, understanding the asset price behavior and making a decision to enter into an option contract is quite challenging, called option pricing problem, because underlying asset price might vary violently. In this paper, we propose a nature‐inspired soft computing, meta‐heuristic, particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm to price options. We modify the PSO algorithm and incorporate varying volatility parameters to price options. The proposed algorithm, PSO with Varying Volatility (PSOwVV), is experimented with various PSO and financial parametric conditions. We also develop a parallel PSOwVV algorithm and implement on a distributed shared memory multi‐core machine. We show that the parallel algorithm performs well when the number of particles is linearly proportional to the number of processors. The parallel algorithm achieves a speedup of approximately 20× with 64 particles on a four node hybrid cluster. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".