MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795619531 · doi:10.1142/s2424786318500019

Implied volatility surfaces during the period of global financial crisis

2018· article· en· W2795619531 on OpenAlexafffund
Tony S. Wirjanto, Anyi Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsRoyal Bank of CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsVolatility (finance)EconometricsFinancial crisisImplied volatilityEconomicsRegressionVolatility smileForward volatilityCovariateParametric statisticsStochastic volatilityMathematicsStatisticsMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper adopts a parametric regression approach to model and calibrate implied volatility surface during the period of the global financial crisis. Due to its relatively low computational cost, it facilitates comparison across a great number of different competing models. The proposed regression models are backtested against historical S&P 500 prices during both volatile and non-volatile periods as proxied by the VIX index around the same time period, and the fits of the models are assessed. Furthermore both an equally weighted scheme and an alternative scheme based on observed implied volatilities as the weight are deployed and the results produced by these two schemes are contrasted and compared. Finally the concept of promptness, instead of the more traditional concept of time to maturity, is introduced as a covariate in the regression models to better capture the shape of the volatility surface during the period characterized by a prolonged low interest-rate environment.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial EngineeringSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207