MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2952886188 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1103.1006

Arbitrage and Hedging in a non probabilistic framework

2011· preprint· en· W2952886188 on OpenAlexaff
Alexánder Álvarez, Sebastián Ferrando, Pablo Olivares

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2011
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbabilistic logicArbitragePath (computing)Index arbitrageFundamental theorem of asset pricingComputer scienceFixed income arbitrageMathematical economicsMathematical optimizationRisk arbitrageMathematicsEconomicsEconometricsFinancial economicsArbitrage pricing theoryArtificial intelligenceCapital asset pricing model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper studies the concepts of hedging and arbitrage in a non probabilistic framework. It provides conditions for non probabilistic arbitrage based on the topological structure of the trajectory space and makes connections with the usual notion of arbitrage. Several examples illustrate the non probabilistic arbitrage as well perfect replication of options under continuous and discontinuous trajectories, the results can then be applied in probabilistic models path by path. The approach is related to recent financial models that go beyond semimartingales, we remark on some of these connections and provide applications of our results to some of these models.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.010
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.099 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicStochastic processes and financial applications→French-language works237,207→