Estimating the roughness exponent of stochastic volatility from discrete observations of the integrated variance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the problem of estimating the roughness of the volatility process in a stochastic volatility model that arises as a nonlinear function of fractional Brownian motion with drift. To this end, we introduce a new estimator that measures the so-called roughness exponent of a continuous trajectory, based on discrete observations of its antiderivative. The estimator has a very simple form and can be computed with great efficiency on large data sets. It is not derived from distributional assumptions but from strictly pathwise considerations. We provide conditions on the underlying trajectory under which our estimator converges in a strictly pathwise sense. Then we verify that these conditions are satisfied by almost every sample path of fractional Brownian motion (with drift). As a consequence, we obtain strong consistency theorems in the context of a large class of rough volatility models, such as the rough fractional volatility model and the rough Bergomi model. We also demonstrate that our estimator is robust with respect to proxy errors between the integrated and realized variance, and that it can be applied to estimate the roughness exponent directly from the price trajectory. Numerical simulations show that our estimation procedure performs well after passing to a scale-invariant modification of our estimator.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".