MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2735401684 · doi:10.3390/jrfm10030016

Global Hedging through Post-Decision State Variables

2017· article· en· W2735401684 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Michèle Breton, Frédéric Godin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityHEC Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTransaction costGreeksPortfolioState variableDynamic programmingComputer scienceVariable (mathematics)Mathematical optimizationDatabase transactionProject portfolio managementState (computer science)EconometricsEconomicsMathematicsFinanceFinancial economicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unlike delta-hedging or similar methods based on Greeks, global hedging is an approach that optimizes some terminal criterion that depends on the difference between the value of a derivative security and that of its hedging portfolio at maturity or exercise. Global hedging methods in discrete time can be implemented using dynamic programming. They provide optimal strategies at all rebalancing dates for all possible states of the world, and can easily accommodate transaction fees and other frictions. However, considering transaction fees in the dynamic programming model requires the inclusion of an additional state variable, which translates into a significant increase of the computational burden. In this short note, we show how a decomposition technique based on the concept of post-decision state variables can be used to reduce the complexity of the computations to the level of a problem without transaction fees. The latter complexity reduction allows for substantial gains in terms of computing time and should therefore contribute to increasing the applicability of global hedging schemes in practice where the timely execution of portfolio rebalancing trades is crucial.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial management→Same topicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies→French-language works237,207→