MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406957766 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18020063

Diagnostic for Volatility and Local Influence Analysis for the Vasicek Model

2025· article· en· W4406957766 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Manuel Galea, Alonso Molina, Isabelle S. Beaudry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVasicek modelVolatility (finance)EconometricsLocal volatilityEconomicsComputer scienceStochastic volatilityMonetary economicsInterest rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Ornstein–Uhlenbeck process is widely used in modeling biological systems and, in financial engineering, is commonly employed to describe the dynamics of interest rates, currency exchange rates, and asset price volatilities. As in any stochastic model, influential observations, such as outliers, can significantly influence the accuracy of statistical analysis and the conclusions we draw from it. Identifying atypical data is, therefore, an essential step in any statistical analysis. In this work, we explore a set of methods called local influence, which helps us understand how small changes in the data or model can affect an analysis. We focus on deriving local influence methods for models that predict interest or currency exchange rates, specifically the stochastic model called the Vasicek model. We develop and implement local influence diagnostic techniques based on likelihood displacement, assessing the impact of the perturbation of the variance and the response. We also introduce a novel and simple way to test whether the model’s variability stays constant over time based on the Gradient test. The purpose of these methods is to identify potential risks of reaching incorrect conclusions from the model, such as the inaccurate prediction of future interest rates. Finally, we illustrate the methodology using the monthly exchange rate between the US dollar and the Swiss franc over a period exceeding 20 years and assess the performance through a simulation study.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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 venueJournal of risk and financial management→Same topicStochastic processes and financial applications→French-language works237,207→