MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409089923 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18040192

Hedging via Perpetual Derivatives: Trinomial Option Pricing and Implied Parameter Surface Analysis

2025· article· en· W4409089923 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jagdish Gnawali, W. Brent Lindquist, Svetlozar T. Rachev

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
KeywordsTrinomialTrinomial treeValuation of optionsCall optionMathematicsAsian optionEconomicsFinancial economicsMathematical economicsEconometricsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a fairly general, recombining trinomial tree model in the natural world. Market completeness is ensured by considering a market consisting of two risky assets, a riskless asset and a European option. The two risky assets consist of a stock and a perpetual derivative of that stock. The option has the stock and its derivative as its underlying. Using a replicating portfolio, we develop prices for European options and generate the unique relationships between the risk-neutral and real-world parameters of the model. We discuss calibration of the model to empirical data in the cases in which the risky asset returns are treated as either arithmetic or logarithmic. From historical price and call option data for select large cap stocks, we develop implied parameter surfaces for the real-world parameters in the model.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial management→Same topicStochastic processes and financial applications→French-language works237,207→