MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987069098 · doi:10.5555/1030818.1030863

New simulation methodology for finance: efficient simulation of gamma and variance-gamma processes

2003· article· en· W1987069098 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWinter Simulation Conference · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Approximation and Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodRejection samplingBrownian bridgeMonte Carlo integrationImportance samplingHybrid Monte CarloQuasi-Monte Carlo methodGamma processVariance (accounting)Variance-gamma distributionComputer scienceStochastic processVariance reductionSampling (signal processing)MathematicsAlgorithmStatistical physicsBrownian motionMarkov chain Monte CarloStatisticsPhysicsAccountingEstimator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study algorithms for sampling discrete-time paths of a gamma process and a variance gamma process, defined as a Brownian process with random time change obeying a gamma process. The attractive feature of the algorithms is that increments of the processes over longer time scales are assigned to the first sampling coordinates. The algorithms are based on having in explicit form the process' conditional distributions, are similar in spirit to the Brownian bridge sampling algorithms proposed for financial Monte Carlo, and synergize with quasi-Monte Carlo techniques for efficiency improvement. We compare the variance and efficiency of ordinary Monte Carlo and quasi-Monte Carlo for an example of financial option pricing with the variance-gamma model, taken from Madan, Carr, and Chang (1998).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score0.914

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.207
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.198 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it