MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224220186 · doi:10.3390/jrfm15050189

On the Asymptotic Behavior of the Optimal Exercise Price Near Expiry of an American Put Option under Stochastic Volatility

2022· article· en· W4224220186 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wenting Chen, Song‐Ping Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStochastic volatilityVolatility (finance)Black–Scholes modelImplied volatilityHeston modelVolatility smileCall optionEconometricsEconomicsSABR volatility modelValuation of optionsPut optionAsymptotic expansionMathematicsMathematical economicsFinancial economicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The behavior of the optimal exercise price of American puts near expiry has been well studied under the Black–Scholes model as a result of a series of publications. However, the behavior of the optimal exercise price under a stochastic volatility model, such as the Heston model, has not been reported at all. Adopting the method of matched asymptotic expansions, this paper addresses the asymptotic behavior of American put options on a dividend-paying underlying with stochastic volatility near expiry. Through our analyses, we are able to show that the option price will be quite different from that evaluated under the Black–Scholes model, while the leading-order term of the optimal exercise price remains almost the same as the constant volatility case if the spot volatility is given the same value as the constant volatility in the Black–Scholes model. Results from numerical experiments also suggest that our analytical formulae derived from the asymptotic analysis are quite reasonable approximations for options with remaining times to expiry in the order of days or weeks.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207