MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114211440 · doi:10.3905/jod.2000.319146

Stock Evolution Under Stochastic Volatility

2000· article· en· W2114211440 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

VenueThe Journal of Derivatives · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStochastic volatilityEconometricsMean reversionValuation (finance)Volatility (finance)Volatility smileEconomicsStock (firearms)Implied volatilityVolatility swapStochastic processFinancial economicsMathematicsFinanceStatisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stochastic volatility appears to be a fact of life in real-world derivatives markets, but it presents huge difficulties for valuation models. Adding a second stochastic variable in addition to the asset price significantly complicates matters. And things become only worse if one wants to model the volatility process realistically, as having a mean-reverting drift of the stock price process as a priced factor. Amercican exercise throws further complications into the situation. A number of useful closed-form and numerical approximation models have been developed over time, but only for particular special cases. In this article, Leisen presents a procedure for constructing a general three-dimensional valuation lattice that can handle a broad range of stochastic volatility models, including those in the literature.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.206 · 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