$ε$-Monotone Fourier Methods for Optimal Stochastic Control in Finance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stochastic control problems in finance often involve complex controls at discrete times. As a result numerically solving such problems, for example using methods based on partial differential or integro-differential equations, inevitably give rise to low order accuracy, usually at most second order. In many cases one can make use of Fourier methods to efficiently advance solutions between control monitoring dates and then apply numerical optimization methods across decision times. However Fourier methods are not monotone and as a result give rise to possible violations of arbitrage inequalities. This is problematic in the context of control problems, where the control is determined by comparing value functions. In this paper we give a preprocessing step for Fourier methods which involves projecting the Green's function onto the set of linear basis functions. The resulting algorithm is guaranteed to be monotone (to within a tolerance), $\ell_\infty$-stable and satisfies an $ε$-discrete comparison principle. In addition the algorithm has the same complexity per step as a standard Fourier method while at the same time having second order accuracy for smooth problems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".