MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993478052 · doi:10.1080/13527260600963851

Indifference Pricing and Hedging for Volatility Derivatives

2007· article· en· W1993478052 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

VenueApplied Mathematical Finance · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolatility (finance)Stochastic volatilityHeston modelEconomicsVolatility smileSwap (finance)EconometricsIncomplete marketsMathematical economicsImplied volatilityValuation of optionsVolatility swapFinancial marketVariance swapSABR volatility modelMicroeconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Utility based indifference pricing and hedging are now considered to be an economically natural method for valuing contingent claims in incomplete markets. However, acceptance of these concepts by the wide financial community has been hampered by the computational and conceptual difficulty of the approach. This paper focuses on the problem of computing indifference prices for derivative securities in a class of incomplete stochastic volatility models general enough to include important examples. A rigorous development is presented based on identifying the natural martingales in the model, leading to a nonlinear Feynman–Kac representation for the indifference price of contingent claims on volatility. To illustrate the power of this representation, closed form solutions are given for the indifference price of a variance swap in the standard Heston model and in a new “reciprocal Heston” model. These are the first known explicit formulas for the indifference price for a class of derivatives that is important to the finance industry.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.757
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.215 · 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