MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137467291 · doi:10.1002/fut.10096

Approximating American option prices in the GARCH framework

2003· article· en· W2137467291 on OpenAlexaff
Jin‐Chuan Duan, Geneviève Gauthier, Caroline Sasseville, Jean‐Guy Simonato

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Futures Markets · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)HEC MontréalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityUnivariateBivariate analysisEconometricsBinomial options pricing modelValuation (finance)Context (archaeology)EconomicsMathematicsValuation of optionsMultivariate statisticsStatisticsVolatility (finance)FinanceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article proposes an efficient approach for computing the prices of American style options in the GARCH framework. Rubinstein's (1998) Edgeworth tree idea is combined with the analytical formulas for moments of the cumulative return under GARCH developed in Duan et al. (1999, 2002) to yield a simple recombining binomial tree for option valuation in the GARCH context. Because the resulting tree is univariate, the proposed approach represents a convenient approximation of the bivariate GARCH system. Numerical analysis is used to demonstrate the speed and accuracy of the proposed approximation. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 23:915–929, 2003

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations19
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Futures MarketsSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207