MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047503222 · doi:10.1108/15265941011092077

Option pricing for jump diffussion model with random volatility

2010· article· en· W2047503222 on OpenAlexaff
A. Thavaneswaran, Jagbir Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Risk Finance · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKurtosisVolatility (finance)Jump diffusionVolatility smileStochastic volatilityEconometricsImplied volatilityValuation of optionsSABR volatility modelJumpForward volatilityEconomicsFinancial models with long-tailed distributions and volatility clusteringMathematicsStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Option pricing based on Black‐Scholes model is typically obtained under the assumption that the volatility of the return is a constant. The purpose of this paper is to develop a new method for pricing derivatives under the jump diffusion model with random volatility by viewing the call price as an expected value of a truncated lognormal distribution. Design/methodology/approach Using Taylor series expansion the call price under random volatility is expressed as a function of kurtosis of the observed volatility process and applied to various class of GARCH models. Findings A modified option pricing formula is developed for jump diffusion process model with random volatility. Originality/value The main contribution of the paper is the development of a kurtosis‐dependent option pricing formula for a jump diffusion model with random volatility.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Risk FinanceSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207