MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409966396 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18050239

Variational Autoencoders for Completing the Volatility Surfaces

2025· article· en· W4409966396 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bienvenue Feugang Nteumagné, Hermann Azemtsa Donfack, C. Wafo Soh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Johannesburg
KeywordsVolatility (finance)Artificial intelligenceEconometricsComputer scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Variational autoencoders (VAEs) have emerged as a promising tool for modeling volatility surfaces, with particular significance for generating synthetic implied volatility scenarios that enhance risk management capabilities. This study evaluates VAE performance using synthetic volatility surfaces, chosen specifically for their arbitrage-free properties and clean data characteristics. Through a comprehensive comparison with traditional methods including thin-plate spline interpolation, parametric models (SABR and SVI), and deterministic autoencoders, we demonstrate that our VAE approach with latent space optimization consistently outperforms existing methods, particularly in scenarios with extreme data sparsity. Our findings show that accurate, arbitrage-free surface reconstruction is achievable using only 5% of the original data points, with errors 7–12 times lower than competing approaches in high-sparsity scenarios. We rigorously validate the preservation of critical no-arbitrage conditions through probability distribution analysis and total variance strip non-intersection tests. The framework we develop overcomes traditional barriers of limited market data by generating over 13,500 synthetic surfaces for training, compared to typical market availability of fewer than 100. These capabilities have important implications for market risk analysis, derivatives pricing, and the development of more robust risk management frameworks, particularly in emerging markets or for newly introduced derivatives where historical data are scarce. Our integration of machine learning with financial theory constraints represents a significant advancement in volatility surface modeling that balances statistical accuracy with financial relevance.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207