MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Financial Applications of Symbolically Generated Compact Finite Difference Formulae

2007· article· en· W63032655 on OpenAlexaff
Jichao Zhao, Robert M. Corless, Matt Davison

Bibliographic record

VenueBirkhäuser Basel eBooks · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompact finite differenceMathematicsFinite difference methodPartial differential equationFinite differenceBoundary value problemOrdinary differential equationHeat equationFinite difference methods for option pricingFinite difference coefficientDifferential equationBoundary (topology)Mathematical analysisApplied mathematicsBlack–Scholes modelFinite element methodPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce the standard fourth order compact finite difference formulae. We show how these formulae apply in the special case of the heat equation. It is well known that the American option pricing problem may be formulated in terms of the Black Scholes partial differential equation (PDE) together with a free boundary condition. Standard methods allow this problem to be transformed into a moving boundary heat equation problem. We use the compact finite difference method to reduce this problem to a system of ordinary differential equations with specified initial conditions. We develop three ways of combining the resulting systems with methods designed to cope with free boundary values. We show that the compact finite difference scheme for the heat equation and for the American options pricing problem are unconditionally stable. After numerical comparison of these methods with a standard Crank Nicholson projected Successive Over Relaxation method, we conclude that the compact finite difference technique respresents an exciting new method for pricing American options.

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 score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.904

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBirkhäuser Basel eBooksSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207