MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123748904

Pricing Installment Options with an Application to ASX Installment Warrants

2002· article· en· W3123748904 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers du GERAD · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWarrantValuation of optionsFlexibility (engineering)Call optionExotic optionPut optionComputer scienceMoneynessRange (aeronautics)EconomicsActuarial scienceBusinessMicroeconomicsFinanceEconometricsEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Installment options are Bermudan-style options where the holder periodically decides whether to exercise or not and then to keep the option alive or not (by paying the installment). We develop a dynamic programming procedure to price installment options. We derive the range of installments within which the installment option is not redundant with the European contract. Simulations analysis shows the method yields monotonically converging prices, and satisfactory trade-offs between accuracy and computational time. In addition, we examine the flexibility in installment option design that yields various hedging properties. Our approach is applied to installment warrants, which are actively traded on the Australian Stock Exchange. Numerical investigation shows the various capital dilution effects resulting from different installment warrant designs.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.715

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.181 · 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