MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321497586 · doi:10.3389/frai.2023.1129370

Gamma and vega hedging using deep distributional reinforcement learning

2023· article· en· W4321497586 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Artificial Intelligence · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of SussexUniversity of TorontoRoyal Bank of CanadaRotman School of Management, University of TorontoGlobal Risk Institute in Financial ServicesTD Bank
KeywordsTransaction costVegaPortfolioReinforcement learningRobustness (evolution)Quantile regressionComputer scienceEconometricsAsset (computer security)Database transactionPosition (finance)EconomicsMicroeconomicsArtificial intelligenceFinancial economicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We show how reinforcement learning can be used in conjunction with quantile regression to develop a hedging strategy for a trader responsible for derivatives that arrive stochastically and depend on a single underlying asset. We assume that the trader makes the portfolio delta-neutral at the end of each day by taking a position in the underlying asset. We focus on how trades in options can be used to manage gamma and vega. The option trades are subject to transaction costs. We consider three different objective functions. We reach conclusions on how the optimal hedging strategy depends on the trader's objective function, the level of transaction costs, and the maturity of the options used for hedging. We also investigate the robustness of the hedging strategy to the process assumed for the underlying asset.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.766
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.196
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.226 · 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