MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2438912517 · doi:10.21002/icmr.v4i1.3665

Market Price of Risk Analysis from Three Major Industrial Countries on the Stability of the Brennan-Schwartz Model

2012· article· en· W2438912517 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tri Handhika

Bibliographic record

VenueIndonesian Capital Market Review · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmerging marketsEconomicsFinancial economicsStability (learning theory)EconometricsMacroeconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At any given time, market price of risk must be the same for all derivatives and it is linked in par-ticular to interest rate. The Brennan-Schwartz model is one of the stochastic differential equations for the interest rate under the risk neutral probability measure. To estimate parameters of this model, it is required that the real data which are collected in the real world in which the distribution of interest rate process is under the actual probability measure. Therefore, parameter estimators are obtained by changing the measure which is determined by the market price of risk. Hence, market price of risk must make the Brennan-Schwartz model becomes stable, which is important to describe resistance of the model to the perturbation in the initial state or parameters of the model. This paper aims to analyze the market price of risk from three major industrial countries: USA, Japan, and Canada. This analysis can be used as a guideline to decide that the interest rate of these three major industrial countries can be modeled as Brennan-Schwartz model. ");} // --> activate javascript

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndonesian Capital Market ReviewSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207