MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124681660 · doi:10.1111/mafi.12144

On peacocks and lyrebirds: Australian options, Brownian bridges, and the average of submartingales

2017· article· en· W3124681660 on OpenAlexaff
Christian‐Oliver Ewald, Marc Yor

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Finance · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsJaneway Children's Health and Rehabilitation Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical economicsContext (archaeology)Brownian motionJump diffusionBrownian bridgeEconometricsMathematicsAsian optionClass (philosophy)JumpRegular polygonEconomicsMathematical financeApplied mathematicsStatistical physicsComputer scienceFinancial economicsStatisticsValuation of optionsGeographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We introduce a class of stochastic processes, which we refer to as lyrebirds. These extend a class of stochastic processes, which have recently been coined peacocks, but are more commonly known as processes that are increasing in the convex order. We show how these processes arise naturally in the context of Asian and Australian options and consider further applications, such as the arithmetic average of a Brownian bridge and the average of submartingales, including the case of Asian and Australian options where the underlying features constant elasticity of variance or is of Merton jump diffusion type.

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)0.006
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical FinanceSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207