MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886715177 · doi:10.1002/asmb.2380

Mean‐variance hedging with basis risk

2018· article· en· W2886715177 on OpenAlexafffund
Xiaole Xue, Jinggong Zhang, Chengguo Weng

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Shandong ProvinceChina Scholarship CouncilSociety of Actuaries
KeywordsBasis riskBasis (linear algebra)Variance (accounting)EconometricsStochastic differential equationMathematicsRisk managementEconomicsActuarial scienceMalliavin calculusAsset (computer security)Mathematical economicsQuadratic equationTime consistencyApplied mathematicsComputer scienceDifferential equationCapital asset pricing modelFinanceStochastic partial differential equation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Basis risk arises in a number of financial and insurance risk management problems when the hedging assets do not perfectly match the underlying asset in a hedging program. Notable examples in insurance include the hedging for longevity risks, weather index–based insurance products, variable annuities, etc. In the presence of basis risk, a perfect hedging is impossible, and in this paper, we adopt a mean‐variance criterion to strike a balance between the expected hedging error and its variability. Under a time‐dependent diffusion model setup, explicit optimal solutions are derived for the hedging target being either a European option or a forward contract. The solutions are obtained by a delicate application of the linear quadratic control theory, the method of backward stochastic differential equation, and Malliavin calculus. A numerical example is presented to illustrate our theoretical results and their interesting implications.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.943

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Stochastic Models in Business and IndustrySame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207