MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073817404 · doi:10.1093/imanum/drn067

Weak convergence in the Prokhorov metric of methods for stochastic differential equations

2009· article· en· W2073817404 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIMA Journal of Numerical Analysis · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsLipschitz continuityWeak convergenceConvergence (economics)Convergence testsApplied mathematicsCorollaryCompact convergenceStochastic differential equationSmoothnessConvergence of random variablesModes of convergence (annotated index)Mathematical proofMetric spaceMetric (unit)Uniform convergenceNormal convergenceRate of convergenceMathematical analysisRandom variableDiscrete mathematicsTopological spaceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the weak convergence of numerical methods for stochastic differential equations (SDEs). Weak convergence is usually expressed in terms of the convergence of expected values of test functions of the trajectories. Here we present an alternative formulation of weak convergence in terms of the well-known Prokhorov metric on spaces of random variables. For a general class of methods we establish bounds on the rates of convergence in terms of the Prokhorov metric. In doing so, we revisit the original proofs of weak convergence and show explicitly how the bounds on the error depend on the smoothness of the test functions. As an application of our result, we use the Strassen–Dudley theorem to show that the numerical approximation and the true solution to the system of SDEs can be re-embedded in a probability space in such a way that the method converges there in a strong sense. One corollary of this last result is that the method converges in the Wasserstein distance, another metric on spaces of random variables. Another corollary establishes rates of convergence for expected values of test functions, assuming only local Lipschitz continuity. We conclude with a review of the existing results for pathwise convergence of weakly converging methods and the corresponding strong results available under re-embedding.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.290 · 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