MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153549760 · doi:10.1155/s0161171201005701

Asymptotic analysis of American call options

2001· article· en· W2153549760 on OpenAlexaff
Ghada Alobaidi, Roland Mallier

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpirationMathematicsBoundary (topology)Free boundary problemCall optionConstraint (computer-aided design)Put optionObligationBoundary value problemMathematical economicsValue (mathematics)Optimal stoppingOption valueMathematical analysisMathematical optimizationActuarial scienceEconometricsEconomicsMedicineStatisticsMicroeconomicsGeometryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

American call options are financial derivatives that give the holder the right but not the obligation to buy an underlying security at a pre‐determined price. They differ from European options in that they may be exercised at any time prior to their expiration, rather than only at expiration. Their value is described by the Black‐Scholes PDE together with a constraint that arises from the possibility of early exercise. This leads to a free boundary problem for the optimal exercise boundary, which determines whether or not it is beneficial for the holder to exercise the option prior to expiration. However, an exact solution cannot be found, and therefore by using asymptotic techniques employed in the study of boundary layers in fluid mechanics, we find an asymptotic expression for the location of the optimal exercise boundary and the value of the option near to expiration.

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)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations18
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical SciencesSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207