MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406246056 · doi:10.3390/math13020213

Convergence Speed of Bermudan, Randomized Bermudan, and Canadian Options

2025· article· en· W4406246056 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Guillaume Leduc

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAmerican University of Sharjah
KeywordsConvergence (economics)Valuation of optionsMathematical optimizationEconometricsVolatility (finance)EconomicsMathematical economicsComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

American options have long received considerable attention in the literature, with numerous publications dedicated to their pricing. Bermudan and randomized Bermudan options are broadly used to estimate their prices efficiently. Notably, the penalty method yields option prices that coincide with those of randomized Bermudan options. However, theoretical results regarding the speed of convergence of these approximations to the American option price remain scarce. In this paper, we address this gap by establishing a general result on the convergence speed of Bermudan and randomized Bermudan option prices to their American limits. We prove that for convex payoff functions, the convergence speed is linear; that is, of order 1/n, where n denotes the number of exercisable opportunities in the Bermudan case and serves as the intensity parameter of the underlying Poisson process in the randomized Bermudan case. Our framework is quite general, encompassing Lévy models, stochastic volatility models, and nearly any risk-neutral model that can be incorporated within a strong Markov framework. We extend our analysis to Canadian options, showing under mild conditions a convergence rate of 1/n to their American limits. To our knowledge, this is the first study addressing the speed of convergence in Canadian option pricing.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.208 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematicsSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207