MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163349005 · doi:10.3390/jrfm4010074

Use of Bayesian Estimates to determine the Volatility Parameter Input in the Black-Scholes and Binomial Option Pricing Models

2011· article· en· W2163349005 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shu Ho, Alan Lee, Alastair Marsden

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImplied volatilityEconometricsVolatility (finance)Volatility smileEconomicsForward volatilityStochastic volatilityBlack–Scholes modelVolatility swapBayesian probabilityValuation of optionsVolatility risk premiumFinancial economicsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The valuation of options and many other derivative instruments requires an estimation of exante or forward looking volatility. This paper adopts a Bayesian approach to estimate stock price volatility. We find evidence that overall Bayesian volatility estimates more closely approximate the implied volatility of stocks derived from traded call and put options prices compared to historical volatility estimates sourced from IVolatility.com (“IVolatility”). Our evidence suggests use of the Bayesian approach to estimate volatility can provide a more accurate measure of ex-ante stock price volatility and will be useful in the pricing of derivative securities where the implied stock price volatility cannot be observed.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207