Continuous time mean‐variance optimal portfolio allocation under jump diffusion: An numerical impulse control approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present efficient partial differential equation methods for continuous time mean‐variance portfolio allocation problems when the underlying risky asset follows a jump‐diffusion. The standard formulation of mean‐variance optimal portfolio allocation problems, where the total wealth is the underlying stochastic process, gives rise to a one‐dimensional (1D) nonlinear Hamilton–Jacobi–Bellman (HJB) partial integrodifferential equation (PIDE) with the control present in the integrand of the jump term, and thus is difficult to solve efficiently. To preserve the efficient handling of the jump term, we formulate the asset allocation problem as a 2D impulse control problem, 1D for each asset in the portfolio, namely the bond and the stock. We then develop a numerical scheme based on a semi‐Lagrangian timestepping method, which we show to be monotone, consistent, and stable. Hence, assuming a strong comparison property holds, the numerical solution is guaranteed to converge to the unique viscosity solution of the corresponding HJB PIDE. The correctness of the proposed numerical framework is verified by numerical examples. We also discuss the effects on the efficient frontier of realistic financial modeling, such as different borrowing and lending interest rates, transaction costs, and constraints on the portfolio, such as maximum limits on borrowing and solvency. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Numer Methods Partial Differential Eq 30: 664–698, 2014
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".