MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410862820 · doi:10.3390/ijfs13020091

Markov-Modulated and Shifted Wishart Processes with Applications in Derivatives Pricing

2025· article· en· W4410862820 on OpenAlex
Behzad-Hussein Azadie Faraz, Hamid R. Arian, Marcos Escobar‐Anel

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWishart distributionMarkov chainEconomicsEconometricsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The popular Wishart (WI) processes, first introduced by Bru in 1991, exhibit convenient analytical properties for modeling asset prices, particularly a closed-form characteristic function, and the ability to jointly model stochastic volatility and correlation. These features tend to increase substantially during crisis periods, more than predicted by a Wishart dynamic. Moreover, the variance processes implied by the Wishart, similar to CIR models, have no buffer away from zero. In this paper, we introduced the Markov-Modulated Shifted Wishart processes (MMSW) and the embedded Shifted Wishart processes (SW) to address these shortcomings in the modeling of asset prices. We obtain analytical representations for several characteristic functions. We also estimate the parameters and evaluate the price of Spread options via the Fourier transform under the two new models compared to the standard Wishart. Our analyses demonstrate a significant impact of the MMSW process compared to the standard Wishart process of up to 7% in Spread option prices.

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.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.252 · 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