Option Pricing under Randomised GBM Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By employing a randomisation procedure on the variance parameter of the standard geometric Brownian motion (GBM) model, we construct new families of analytically tractable asset pricing models. In particular, we develop two explicit families of processes that are respectively referred to as the randomised gamma (G) and randomised inverse gamma (IG) models, both characterised by a shape and scale parameter. Both models admit relatively simple closed-form analytical expressions for the transition density and the no-arbitrage prices of standard European-style options whose Black-Scholes implied volatilities exhibit symmetric smiles in the log-forward moneyness. Surprisingly, for integer-valued shape parameter and arbitrary positive real scale parameter, the analytical option pricing formulas involve only elementary functions and are even more straightforward than the standard (constant volatility) Black-Scholes (GBM) pricing formulas. Moreover, we show some interesting characteristics of the risk-neutral transition densities of the randomised G and IG models, both exhibiting fat tails. In fact, the randomised IG density only has finite moments of the order less than or equal to one. In contrast, the randomised G density has a finite first moment with finite higher moments depending on the time-to-maturity and its scale parameter. We show how the randomised G and IG models are efficiently and accurately calibrated to market equity option data, having pronounced implied volatility smiles across several strikes and maturities. We also calibrate the same option data to the wellknown SABR (Stochastic Alpha Beta Rho) model.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".