Fitting the Seven-Parameter Generalized Tempered Stable Distribution to Financial Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes and implements a methodology to fit a seven-parameter Generalized Tempered Stable (GTS) distribution to financial data. The nonexistence of the mathematical expression of the GTS probability density function makes maximum-likelihood estimation (MLE) inadequate for providing parameter estimations. Based on the function characteristic and the fractional Fourier transform (FRFT), we provide a comprehensive approach to circumvent the problem and yield a good parameter estimation of the GTS probability. The methodology was applied to fit two heavy-tailed data (Bitcoin and Ethereum returns) and two peaked data (S&P 500 and SPY ETF returns). For each historical data, the estimation results show that six-parameter estimations are statistically significant except for the local parameter, μ. The goodness of fit was assessed through Kolmogorov–Smirnov, Anderson–Darling, and Pearson’s chi-squared statistics. While the two-parameter geometric Brownian motion (GBM) hypothesis is always rejected, the GTS distribution fits significantly with a very high p-value and outperforms the Kobol, Carr–Geman–Madan–Yor, and bilateral Gamma distributions.
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 | 0.006 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".