MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105362692 · doi:10.1142/s0219024911006401

A COMPARISON OF PRICING KERNELS FOR GARCH OPTION PRICING WITH GENERALIZED HYPERBOLIC DISTRIBUTIONS

2011· article· en· W2105362692 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandru Badescu, Robert J. Elliott, Reg Kulperger, Jarkko Miettinen, Tak Kuen Siu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsActuaWestern UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStochastic discount factorKernel (algebra)Autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityEconomicsEconometricsValuation of optionsMathematical economicsMathematicsCapital asset pricing modelVolatility (finance)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Under discrete-time GARCH models markets are incomplete so there is more than one price kernel for valuing contingent claims. This motivates the quest for selecting an appropriate price kernel. Different methods have been proposed for the choice of a price kernel. Some of them can be justified by economic equilibrium arguments. This paper studies risk-neutral dynamics of various classes of Generalized Hyperbolic GARCH models arising from different price kernels. We discuss the properties of these dynamics and show that for some special cases, some pricing kernels considered here lead to similar risk neutral GARCH dynamics. Real data examples for pricing European options on the S&P 500 index emphasize the importance of the choice of a price kernel.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.284
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations25
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Theoretical and Applied FinanceSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207