ALTERNATIVE RANDOMIZATION FOR VALUING AMERICAN OPTIONS
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
This paper deals with randomization methods for valuing American options written on dividend-paying assets, which are based on the idea of treating the maturity date as a random variable. In the randomization method introduced by Carr in 1998, he used the Erlangian distributed random variable to develop a recursive algorithm starting from the so-called Canadian option with an exponentially distributed random maturity. The purposes of this paper are (i) to provide much simpler pricing formulas for the Canadian option; (ii) to interpret the Gaver–Stehfest method developed for inverting Laplace transforms as an alternative randomization method in the context of valuing American options; and (iii) to evaluate the performance of the Gaver–Stehfest method in details with theoretical and numerical views. Numerical experiments indicate that the Gaver–Stehfest method works well to generate accurate approximations for the early exercise boundary as well as the option value.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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