MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230656597 · doi:10.1002/9780470012505.tan011

Derivative Pricing, Numerical Methods

2004· other· en· W4230656597 on OpenAlex
K.R. Vetzal

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEncyclopedia of Actuarial Science · 2004
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStochastic gameValuation (finance)Valuation of optionsComputer scienceMathematical economicsBlack–Scholes modelNumerical analysisRange (aeronautics)Context (archaeology)Mathematical optimizationExotic optionSimple (philosophy)Applied mathematicsMathematicsEconometricsEconomicsFinanceEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Numerical methods are needed for derivatives pricing in cases where analytic solutions are either unavailable or not easily computable. The subject of numerical methods in the area of derivatives valuation and hedging is very broad. A wide range of different types of contracts are available, and in many cases there are several candidate models for the stochastic evolution of the underlying state variables. Many subtle numerical issues can arise in various contexts. A complete description of these would be very lengthy, so in this article we will only give a sample of the issues involved. The article first presents a detailed description of the different methods available in the context of the Black – Scholes – Merton model for simple European and American‐style equity options. It then describes how the methods can be adapted to more general contexts, such as derivatives dependent on more than one underlying factor, path‐dependent derivatives, and derivatives with discontinuous payoff functions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.773
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.270 · 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