MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367189531 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2304.13128

Computing Volatility Surfaces using Generative Adversarial Networks with Minimal Arbitrage Violations

2023· preprint· en· W4367189531 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Andrew Na, Meixin Zhang, Justin W. L. Wan

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVolatility (finance)Computer scienceDiscriminatorArtificial neural networkGenerative grammarGenerative adversarial networkArbitrageAdversarial systemRegularization (linguistics)Local volatilityArtificial intelligenceImplied volatilityDeep learningEconometricsMathematicsEconomicsFinancial economicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a generative adversarial network (GAN) approach for efficiently computing volatility surfaces. The idea is to make use of the special GAN neural architecture so that on one hand, we can learn volatility surfaces from training data and on the other hand, enforce no-arbitrage conditions. In particular, the generator network is assisted in training by a discriminator that evaluates whether the generated volatility matches the target distribution. Meanwhile, our framework trains the GAN network to satisfy the no-arbitrage constraints by introducing penalties as regularization terms. The proposed GAN model allows the use of shallow networks which results in much less computational costs. In our experiments, we demonstrate the performance of the proposed method by comparing with the state-of-the-art methods for computing implied and local volatility surfaces. We show that our GAN model can outperform artificial neural network (ANN) approaches in terms of accuracy and computational time.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.442
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.342
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.023 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207