MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101835956 · doi:10.1109/wsc.2003.1261439

Efficient simulation of gamma and variance-gamma processes

2004· article· en· W2101835956 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Approximation and Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKillam Trusts
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodRejection samplingBrownian bridgeMonte Carlo integrationHybrid Monte CarloImportance samplingVariance (accounting)Quasi-Monte Carlo methodComputer scienceGamma processStochastic processSampling (signal processing)Statistical physicsAlgorithmVariance reductionSlice samplingMonte Carlo molecular modelingVariance-gamma distributionDynamic Monte Carlo methodMathematicsMarkov chain Monte CarloBrownian motionStatisticsPhysicsAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study algorithms for sampling discrete-time paths of a gamma process and a variance-gamma process, defined as a Brownian process with random time change obeying a gamma process. The attractive feature of the algorithms is that increments of the processes over longer time scales are assigned to the first sampling coordinates. The algorithms are based on having in explicit form the process' conditional distributions, are similar in spirit to the Brownian bridge sampling algorithms proposed for financial Monte Carlo, and synergize with quasi-Monte Carlo techniques for efficiency improvement. We compare the variance and efficiency of ordinary Monte Carlo and quasi-Monte Carlo for an example of financial option pricing with the variance-gamma model.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.274 · 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