MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391281776 · doi:10.1142/s0219024923500280

MULTIVARIATE HAWKES-BASED MODELS IN LIMIT ORDER BOOK: EUROPEAN AND SPREAD OPTION PRICING

2024· article· en· W4391281776 on OpenAlexaff
Qi Guo, Anatoliy Swishchuk, Bruno Rémillard

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicPoint processes and geometric inequalities
Canadian institutionsHEC MontréalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultivariate statisticsLimit (mathematics)EconometricsOrder (exchange)EconomicsFinancial economicsValuation of optionsMathematical economicsMathematicsApplied mathematicsComputer scienceStatistical physicsStatisticsPhysicsMathematical analysisFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider the pricing problem of European options and spread options for the Hawkes-based model in the limit order book (LOB). We introduce a variant of Hawkes process and consider its limit theorems, namely the exponential multivariate general compound Hawkes process (EMGCHP). We also consider a special case of one-dimensional EMGCHP and its limit theorems. Option pricing with one-dimensional EMGCHP in LOB and numerical examples are presented. We also discuss implied volatility and implied order flow. It reveals the relationship between stock volatility and the order flow in the LOB system. In this way, the Hawkes-based model can provide more market forecast information than the classical Black–Scholes model. Margrabe’s spread options valuations with two one-dimensional and one two-dimensional Hawkes-based models for two assets are presented.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.295
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

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
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Theoretical and Applied FinanceSame topicPoint processes and geometric inequalitiesFrench-language works237,207