MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963098793 · doi:10.1214/21-ps1

Lévy-Ito models in finance

2021· preprint· en· W2963098793 on OpenAlexafffund
George Bouzianis, Lane P. Hughston, Sebastian Jaimungal, Leandro Sánchez-Betancourt

Bibliographic record

VenueProbability Surveys · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDivision of Mathematical SciencesConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y TecnologíaUniversity of ManchesterFields Institute for Research in Mathematical SciencesAspen Center for PhysicsSimons Foundation
KeywordsLévy processEconometricsPoisson distributionMeasure (data warehouse)Brownian motionEconomicsCapital asset pricing modelRendleman–Bartter modelAsset (computer security)Interest rateVariety (cybernetics)Financial marketFinancial economicsStochastic discount factorMathematicsFinanceComputer scienceApplied mathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an overview of the broad class of financial models in which the prices of assets are Lévy-Ito processes driven by an n-dimensional Brownian motion and an independent Poisson random measure. The Poisson random measure is associated with an n-dimensional Lévy process. Each model consists of a pricing kernel, a money market account, and one or more risky assets. We show how the excess rate of return above the interest rate can be calculated for risky assets in such models, thus showing the relationship between risk and return when asset prices have jumps. The framework is applied to a variety of asset classes, allowing one to construct new models as well as interesting generalizations of familiar 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProbability SurveysSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207