MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062135744 · doi:10.5555/1030453.1030681

Problems in financial engineering: convergence of the stochastic mesh estimator for pricing American options

2002· article· en· W2062135744 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 · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorUpper and lower boundsValuation of optionsVariance reductionConvergence (economics)MathematicsSample size determinationApplied mathematicsVariance (accounting)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceEconometricsMonte Carlo methodStatisticsEconomicsMathematical analysisAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Broadie and Glasserman proposed a simulation-based method they named stochastic mesh for pricing high dimensional American options. Based on simulated states of the assets underlying the option at each exercise opportunity, the method produces an estimator of the option value at each sampled state. Under the mild assumption of the finiteness of certain moments, we derive an asymptotic upper bound on the probability of error of the mesh estimator, where both the error size and the probability bound vanish as the sample size increases. We include the empirical performance for the test problems used by Broadie and Glasserman in a recent unpublished manuscript. We find that the mesh estimator has large bias that decays very slowly with the sample size, suggesting that in application it will most likely be necessary to employ bias and/or variance reduction techniques.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.193 · 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