MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954914941 · doi:10.1142/s021902492050003x

BRANCHING PARTICLE PRICERS WITH HESTON EXAMPLES

2019· preprint· en· W2954914941 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael A. Kouritzin, Anne MacKay

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversity of Alberta
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsResamplingMonte Carlo methodBranching (polymer chemistry)Particle filterStochastic volatilityMonte Carlo methods for option pricingValuation of optionsJackknife resamplingComputer scienceImportance samplingFinite difference methods for option pricingMarkov chain Monte CarloMathematical optimizationPath dependentHeston modelVolatility (finance)AlgorithmMathematicsApplied mathematicsEconometricsBlack–Scholes modelSABR volatility modelArtificial intelligenceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of sequential Monte Carlo within simulation for path-dependent option pricing is proposed and evaluated. Recently, it was shown that explicit solutions and importance sampling are valuable for efficient simulation of spot price and volatility, especially for purposes of path-dependent option pricing. The resulting simulation algorithm is an analog to the weighted particle filtering algorithm that might be improved by resampling or branching. Indeed, some branching algorithms are shown herein to improve pricing performance substantially while some resampling algorithms are shown to be less suitable in certain cases. A historical property is given and explained as the distinguishing feature between the sequential Monte Carlo algorithms that work on path-dependent option pricing and those that do not. In particular, it is recommended to use the so-called effective particle branching algorithm within importance-sampling Monte Carlo methods for path-dependent option pricing. All recommendations are based upon numeric comparison of option pricing problems in the Heston model.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Theoretical and Applied FinanceSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207