MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782603341 · doi:10.1109/cdc.2017.8263635

An optimal execution problem in finance targeting the market trading speed: An MFG formulation

2017· article· en· W2782603341 on OpenAlexaff
Dena Firoozi, Peter E. Caines

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrading strategyNash equilibriumFinancial marketStock marketMarket impactBest responseMarket microstructureComputer scienceMathematical optimizationEconometricsMathematical economicsEconomicsFinanceMathematicsContext (archaeology)Order (exchange)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The stock market can be modeled as a large population non-cooperative game where (following standard financial models) each trader has stochastic linear dynamics with quadratic cost function. We consider the case where there exists one major trader with significant influence on market movements together with a large number of minor traders, each with individually asymptotically negligible effect on the market. The traders are coupled in their dynamics and cost functions by the market's average trading rate (a component of the system mean field). In this work the theory of partially observed mean field games is extended to cover indefinite LQG problems and then employed to obtain e-Nash equilibria for the market, together with the best response trading strategies where each agent attempts to (i) maximize its wealth, and then also (ii) track a fraction of market's average trading rate, and (iii) avoid large execution prices and large trading accelerations. Illustrative simulations are presented.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207