MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044147077 · doi:10.1080/13518470903448473

Monte Carlo methods for pricing discrete Parisian options

2010· article· en· W2044147077 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

VenueEuropean Journal of Finance · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodMonte Carlo methods for option pricingValuation of optionsControl variatesMaturity (psychological)Computer scienceQuasi-Monte Carlo methodStock priceMathematical optimizationHybrid Monte CarloEconometricsMathematicsMarkov chain Monte CarloSeries (stratigraphy)Statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper develops an efficient Monte Carlo method to price discretely monitored Parisian options based on a control variate approach. The paper also modifies the Parisian option design by assuming the option is exercised when the barrier condition is met rather than at maturity. We obtain formulas for this new design when the underlying is continuously monitored and develop an efficient Monte Carlo method for the discrete case. Our method can also be used for the case of multiple barriers. We use numerical examples to illustrate the approach and reveal important features of the different types of options considered. Some performance-based executive stock options include different tranches of discretely monitored Parisian options and we illustrate this with a practical example.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.260 · 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