Algorithmic Trading with Model Uncertainty
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Algorithmic traders acknowledge that their models are incorrectly specified, thus we allow for ambiguity in their choices to make their models robust to misspecification in (i) the arrival rate of market orders, (ii) the fill probability of limit orders, and (iii) the dynamics of the midprice of the asset they deal. In the context of market making, we demonstrate that market makers (MMs) adjust their quotes to reduce inventory risk and adverse selection costs. Moreover, robust market making increases the strategies' Sharpe ratio and allows the MM to fine tune the trade-off between the mean and the standard deviation of profits. We provide analytical solutions for the robust optimal strategies, show that the resulting dynamic programming equations have classical solutions, and provide a proof of verification. The behavior of the ambiguity averse MM is found to generalize those of a risk averse MM and coincide in a limiting case.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it