MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2950757329 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.13143604

Likelihood Evaluation of Jump-Diffusion Models Using Deterministic Nonlinear Filters

2020· dataset· en· W2950757329 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐François Bégin, Mathieu Boudreault

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2020
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStochastic volatilityJumpParticle filterMathematicsLikelihood functionNonlinear systemJump diffusionVolatility (finance)EconometricsApplied mathematicsCluster analysisMaximum likelihoodStatistical physicsKalman filterStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we develop a deterministic nonlinear filtering algorithm based on a high-dimensional version of Kitagawa’s method to evaluate the likelihood function of models that allow for stochastic volatility and jumps whose arrival intensity is also stochastic. We show numerically that the deterministic filtering method is precise and much faster than the particle filter, in addition to yielding a smooth function over the parameter space. We then find the maximum likelihood estimates of various models that include stochastic volatility, jumps in the returns and variance, and also stochastic jump arrival intensity with the S&P 500 daily returns. During the Great Recession, the jump arrival intensity increases significantly and contributes to the clustering of volatility and negative returns.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.129 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicStochastic processes and financial applications→French-language works237,207→