MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225418952 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2205.00617

A high-order deferred correction method for the solution of free boundary problems using penalty iteration, with an application to American option pricing

2022· preprint· en· W4225418952 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Da‐Wei Wang, Kirill Serkh, Christina christara

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicDifferential Equations and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConvergence (economics)Boundary (topology)Penalty methodMathematical optimizationOrder (exchange)MathematicsDiscontinuity (linguistics)Order of accuracyBoundary value problemApplied mathematicsNumerical analysisMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a high-order deferred correction algorithm combined with penalty iteration for solving free and moving boundary problems, using a fourth-order finite difference method. Typically, when free boundary problems are solved on a fixed computational grid, the order of the solution is low due to the discontinuity in the solution at the free boundary, even if a high-order method is used. Using a detailed error analysis, we observe that the order of convergence of the solution can be increased to fourth-order by solving successively corrected finite difference systems, where the corrections are derived from the previously computed lower order solutions. The penalty iterations converge quickly given a good initial guess. We demonstrate the accuracy and efficiency of our algorithm using several examples. Numerical results show that our algorithm gives fourth-order convergence for both the solution and the free boundary location. We also test our algorithm on the challenging American put option pricing problem. Our algorithm gives the expected high-order convergence.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.126
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.174 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicDifferential Equations and Numerical MethodsFrench-language works237,207