Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 44 references

Anomalous diffusions in option prices: connecting trade duration and the volatility term structure

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Long-dated option prices converge to their payoff as a power law $T^{-\beta}$ when tick-by-tick waiting times are heavy-tailed, making the volatility skew fade slower than the conventional $1/T$ rate.

desk verdict A worthwhile but conditional paper: the new asymptotic results are real, the empirical premise is untested, and Theorem 7.2 has a fixable technical gap. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.03007 v3 pith:3G5YYPBV submitted 2019-08-08 q-fin.PR

Antoine Jacquier , Lorenzo Torricelli This is my paper · ORCID
classification q-fin.PR MSC 60G5160G5260F1791G20
keywords anomalousdiffusioncontinuous-timerandomwalkCTRWimpliedvolatilityskewtermstructureinversestablesubordinatortradedurationoptionpricing
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper argues that the persistent long-maturity volatility skew, which standard Lévy and stochastic volatility models struggle to produce, can be explained by trade duration. It builds asset-price models as scaling limits of tick-by-tick continuous-time random walks whose waiting times have a power-law (infinite-mean) distribution; the limit is a Lévy process time-changed by an inverse stable subordinator. In these models, Call prices converge to their payoff as $T^{-\beta}$, implied volatility vanishes like $\sqrt{\log T/T}$, and the skew decays slower than $1/T$, matching the kind of persistence seen in markets. The paper derives explicit characteristic functions, no-arbitrage pricing formulae, moments, and large- and small-maturity asymptotics for two model classes, and shows numerically that the duration parameter $\beta$ improves cross-sectional fits to persistent skews without altering short-maturity smiles.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the CTRW scaling-limit theorem, which turns a triangular array of tick-by-tick returns and waiting times into the process $((X^-)_{H_t})^+$: a Lévy process $X$ run on the inverse $H$ of a $\beta$-stable subordinator. Here $H_t$ is the first time the subordinator exceeds $t$, and in the DRD model the relevant time change $L^H_t$ has the explicitly known law $tB_{\beta,1-\beta}$, a Beta distribution scaled by $t$. This tractability yields characteristic functions $\Phi_t(z)=E_\beta(-\psi_X(z)t^\beta)$ for SL and $\Phi_t(z)={}_1F_1(\beta,1,-t\psi_X(z))$ for DRD, which feed the Lewis-type pricing integral. The large-maturity analysis then rests on a model-free skew-level relation: if implied volatility itself vanishes, the skew cannot decay as fast as $1/T$.

What would settle it

Measure the tail of inter-trade durations on high-frequency data: if the estimated tail index is consistently at least 1, meaning finite mean waiting times, the CTRW scaling-limit assumption fails and the predicted slow skew loses its foundation. Alternatively, fit the models to option prices and test out of sample: if long-dated implied volatility skews decline as $1/T$ rather than slower than every $T^{-\alpha}$ with $\alpha>1/2$, the paper's central asymptotic claim is contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Within the CTRW framework, the central discovery is that non-exponential waiting times do not average out at long horizons. The scaling limit makes the log-price $Y_t = X_{H_t^-}$, where $X$ is a Lévy process and $H$ is the inverse of an independent $\beta$-stable subordinator (SL model), or a coupled version $X_L$ time-changed by $H$ (DRD model), whose time change $L^H_t$ is distributed as $tB_{\beta,1-\beta}$. For both models, the large-maturity Call price behaves as $1 - C T^{-\beta}$ (plus an exponentially small correction in DRD), which is much slower than the Laplace-type decay of standard Lévy models. Inverting Black-Scholes, the implied volatility satisfies $\sigma_\beta(K,T) \sim 2\sqrt{W_0(C T^{2\beta})/T}$, so the skew $S_\beta(K,T)$ decays slower than every $T^{-\alpha}$ with $\alpha>1/2$, in particular slower than the usual $1/T$, while the short-maturity ATM skew matches the underlying Lévy model. The paper interprets this as a structural connection between trade duration and the persistence of the volatility skew.

Load-bearing premise

The whole slow-skew conclusion rests on real waiting times between trades being so heavy-tailed that their average is infinite; if real waiting times have a finite mean, the anomalous-diffusion limit and the $T^{-\beta}$ option-price decay no longer apply.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim is right, a persistent long-maturity volatility skew does not require a separate stochastic-volatility mechanism: one duration parameter $\beta$, encoding infinite-mean trade waits, produces it.
  • Because $\beta=1$ recovers the underlying Lévy model, $\beta$ acts as a long-term skew component: it leaves the short-maturity ATM skew essentially unchanged but controls how slowly the smile flattens.
  • The implied volatility term structure in both models declines to zero like $\sqrt{\log T/T}$, so long-dated options should be priced with lower implied vols but a skew that survives far longer than in exponential Lévy models.
  • The DRD model has uncorrelated, weakly stationary increments and non-vanishing skewness and kurtosis limits, reproducing two stylized facts of returns while keeping the slow-skew property.
  • A model-free consequence of Lemma 7.1 is that any vanishing long-dated implied volatility level forces a slower-than-$1/T$ skew decay; anomalous diffusions provide one concrete construction.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the mechanism predicts a testable link between the tail index $\beta$ estimated from tick-by-tick waiting times and the long-maturity skew slope estimated from options; the paper does not connect the two on data.
  • Editorial inference: since the calibration in Section 8 is in-sample on synthetic smiles, a natural extension is an out-of-sample test in which $\beta$ estimated from one maturity cross-section predicts the skew at another maturity.
  • Editorial inference: if real waiting times are heavy-tailed but have finite mean (tail index above 1), the CTRW limit changes and the slow-skew effect weakens or disappears, so the model's empirical relevance hinges on trade-duration data rather than option data alone.
  • Editorial inference: the same CTRW construction extends to other long-dated derivatives such as digital options or variance swaps, where the $T^{-\beta}$ price decay should appear directly in the leading-order asymptotics.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops two classes of anomalous diffusion asset price models, SL (purely subdiffusive Lévy) and DRD (dependent returns and trade durations), obtained as scaling limits of continuous-time random walks with power-law waiting times. It derives no-arbitrage pricing formulae in terms of Mittag-Leffler and confluent hypergeometric functions, studies moments and correlation properties, and analyzes large-maturity Call price asymptotics. The central result is that Call prices decay as T^{-β}, so the implied volatility vanishes as √(log T/T) and the implied volatility skew decays more slowly than 1/T, which the authors interpret as a structural explanation of the persistent market skew via trade duration. Section 8 calibrates the models to synthetic smiles built by shifting a Lévy skew to longer maturities and reports RMSE improvements.

Significance. The theoretical framework is attractive and the derivation path (CTRW limit, Fourier-Laplace transforms, special-function expansions, saddle-point integration) is coherent. The paper gives explicit, analytically tractable pricing formulae and unifies several earlier subdiffusive models; the large-maturity asymptotics constitute concrete, falsifiable predictions that can be tested once β is estimated. However, the central asymptotic theorem is not rigorously proven as written, and the empirical support for the market-behaviour claim is currently only synthetic and in-sample; the defining premise (β<1 for real trade durations) is untested. These issues are fixable but essential, so the paper is best viewed for now as a theoretical mechanism with conditional empirical illustration.

major comments (4)
  1. [§8.2, Tables 2–3; Abstract/Introduction] The paper's headline claim that anomalous diffusions 'reproduce the market behaviour of the implied volatility' (Abstract) and provide a 'good fit to market data' (Section 8) is not supported by the evidence presented. Section 8.2 calibrates only to synthetic smiles obtained by shifting a 6-month Lévy skew to 1-year and 18-month maturities, not to observed option prices. Because β is an additional free parameter, the RMSE improvements in Tables 2–3 are in-sample and would be expected even under a misspecified model; no out-of-sample exercise or model-comparison criterion (e.g., BIC/AIC) is reported. Moreover, the persistence mechanism requires the real inter-trade waiting times to be in the domain of attraction of a β-stable law with β<1 (infinite mean); this premise is neither tested using trade data nor supported by empirical tail-index estimates, without which the claim that trade duration explains the market's persistent skew remains conditional.
  2. [§7, Theorem 7.2, after Eq. (7.13)] In the proof of Theorem 7.2, the asymptotic expansion of 1F1 is substituted into the pricing integral (7.11) under the assertion that 'so long as T is much larger than 1/|ψX(i/2)| we can replace ΦT in (7.11) with (7.13)'. This is a pointwise asymptotic; no uniform-in-u bound or justification for interchanging the limit with the integral is supplied. The preceding Stokes-phenomenon discussion is also problematic: in the SL case the condition 'πβ < |arg(-ψX(u+i/2)T0^β)|' is invariant in T0 because T0^β is a positive real, so a large T0 cannot of itself move the argument into the required sector. A rigorous argument (e.g., splitting the u-domain or a Watson-type lemma with uniform error control) is required to establish the T^{-β} leading order in (7.9)-(7.10).
  3. [§7, Corollary 7.3, Eq. (7.20)] Corollary 7.3, Eq. (7.20), states lim_{T→∞} Sβ(K,T)√T = 0. This contradicts the proof of the same corollary: combining (7.3), (7.23), and the final equivalence (7.24) gives a digital-term contribution of order cM/√T, so Sβ(K,T)√T does not converge to zero (it tends to a nonzero constant up to the leading term). The intended conclusion that the skew decays as T^{-1/2}, slower than 1/T, may be correct, but the corollary statement must be corrected and reconciled with its proof.
  4. [§7, Corollary 7.3, proof of (7.24)] The proof of Corollary 7.3 asserts that 'the long-term price decay for the Digital option I_{ST≥K} is identical to that of the Call option, namely c/T^β for some c>0.' This is not demonstrated and does not follow directly from (7.9)-(7.10); a digital payoff requires its own asymptotic analysis. Since this assertion underpins the second term of the skew formula (7.3), it is load-bearing for the main quantitative result and needs a proof.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§8.2] The text says 'we calibrate a total of four anomalous diffusions models, namely: SL-VG, SL-NIG, SL-VG and DRD-VG'; the list contains a duplicate (SL-VG) and omits DRD-NIG.
  2. [Eq. (7.17)] The expression '4√K' is ambiguous; from the saddle point integration it should presumably be K^{1/4} or √K, and the notation should be made consistent with (7.11).
  3. [§8.2] There is a typo in 'Its core MATLAB implementatio'; also 'explained above explained above' is duplicated.
  4. [§6.1] The paper states the models are described in a 'semimartingale setting leading no-arbitrage pricing formulae', but the choice of risk-neutral measures explicitly excludes a market price of duration risk; the abstract and introduction should acknowledge this limitation more prominently.
  5. [§7, Corollary 7.3 proof] The constant Cβ is used both as a generic constant in (7.9)-(7.10) and as Cβ1, Cβ2 in Proposition 7.2; this might confuse readers.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the large-maturity volatility and skew asymptotics are derived from model primitives, with self-citations and the synthetic calibration non-load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation of the headline result is not circular: the paper assumes a CTRW triangular array whose waiting times lie in the domain of attraction of a beta-stable law (beta<1), cites external CTRW limit theorems (Theorem 3.1), derives the characteristic functions via external transform results (Proposition 3.2 and Proposition 4.2), and obtains the large-maturity Call expansions (Eqs. (7.9)-(7.10)) and the implied-volatility/skew rates (Corollary 7.3) by asymptotic analysis of those characteristic functions. Beta is a model parameter in this derivation, not a fitted output, so the T^{-beta} decay and slower-than-1/T skew are consequences of the model rather than restatements of an input. Section 8.2 is an in-sample illustration: it explicitly generates synthetic smiles from a given Levy model and shifts the 6-month skew to create persistence, then calibrates beta; this can show identifiability but is not the source of the theoretical rates, and the lack of real duration data or an empirical estimate of beta is an external-validity limitation, not circularity. The self-citations (Torricelli 2020 for measure changes; Figueroa-Lopez, Forde and Jacquier 2011 for a technical lemma) are not load-bearing for the main asymptotic claim and are not used to exclude competing explanations, so they do not raise the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central asymptotic results depend on the CTRW convergence theorem and on the modeling assumption of infinite-mean waiting times. The paper's contribution is the analysis of these existing models, not the introduction of new entities.

free parameters (4)
  • β (stability index of the waiting-time subordinator) = 0.72 (DRD-VG, scenario 1); 0.65 (DRD-VG, scenario 2); see Tables 2-3
    Controls the heaviness of trade duration tails and the long-maturity skew decay rate; calibrated to synthetic smiles in Section 8.2.
  • VG parameters κ, σ, θ = e.g., (0.90, 0.38, -0.28) for DRD-VG scenario 1
    Variance Gamma Lévy parameters for the return innovation process; fitted in calibration.
  • NIG parameters κ, σ, θ = e.g., (2.56, 0.31, -0.10) for DRD-NIG scenario 1
    Normal Inverse Gaussian parameters; fitted in calibration.
  • CGMY parameters C, G, M, Y = (6.51, 18.75, 32.95, 0.5757) used in Figures 6-9
    Fixed for the numerical illustration of the volatility surfaces, taken from Carr et al. (2001).
assumptions (5)
  • standard math The CTRW convergence theorem (Theorem 3.1) holds for the triangular arrays considered, including dependent components and compound Poisson cases.
    Imported from Becker-Kern et al. (2004), Straka and Henry (2011), Jurlewicz et al. (2012); used as the foundation for the model definition in Section 4.
  • ad hoc to paper Real trade waiting times are in the domain of attraction of a β-stable law with β∈(0,1), so infinite-mean waiting times are assumed.
    This is the modeling assumption that makes the anomalous diffusion limit non-trivial; the paper does not test it on trade data.
  • domain assumption Under the pricing measure Q, only the law of the Lévy process X is changed; the stable subordinator L is left unchanged, so there is no market price of duration risk.
    Stated in Section 6.1: α-stable subordinators are not stable under Esscher transforms, so the authors restrict to measure changes on X only. This limits the generality of the no-arbitrage pricing.
  • standard math The Lévy exponent ψX satisfies (2.2) and the regularity conditions used in Theorem 7.2, including the existence of ψX(i/2) and ψX''(i/2).
    Assumed throughout; needed for the saddle point analysis.
  • standard math The asymptotic expansions of the confluent hypergeometric and Mittag-Leffler functions (Luke 2012; Haubold et al. 2011) are valid on the integration contour and can be interchanged with the integral.
    This interchange is asserted, not fully proved, in the proof of Theorem 7.2.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Anomalous diffusions in option prices: connecting trade duration and the volatility term structure." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3G5YYPBV

@misc{pith2026190803007,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Anomalous diffusions in option prices: connecting trade duration and the volatility term structure},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3G5YYPBV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.03007}
}
read the original abstract

Anomalous diffusions arise as scaling limits of continuous-time random walks (CTRWs) whose innovation times are distributed according to a power law. The impact of a non-exponential waiting time does not vanish with time and leads to different distribution spread rates compared to standard models. In financial modelling this has been used to accommodate for random trade duration in the tick-by-tick price process. We show here that anomalous diffusions are able to reproduce the market behaviour of the implied volatility more consistently than usual L\'evy or stochastic volatility models. We focus on two distinct classes of underlying asset models, one with independent price innovations and waiting times, and one allowing dependence between these two components. These two models capture the well-known paradigm according to which shorter trade duration is associated with higher return impact of individual trades. We fully describe these processes in a semimartingale setting leading no-arbitrage pricing formulae, and study their statistical properties. We observe that skewness and kurtosis of the asset returns do not tend to zero as time goes by. We also characterize the large-maturity asymptotics of Call option prices, and find that the convergence rate is slower than in standard L\'evy regimes, which in turn yields a declining implied volatility term structure and a slower decay of the skew.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.03007 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Paths of XH (blue) and H (green) in the SL model. β = 0.7 on the left and β = 0.95 on the right. Here, X is a driftless Brownian motion with diffusion parameter σ = 0.4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison of the function Φt for the SL and DRD model with the exponential, with β = 0.75, t = 0.5. We used the compensated geometric Brownian motion characteristic exponent φX(z) = σ 2 (z 2 − iz)/2 along the line =(z) = 1/2 where it is real. 30 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Densities of the time change L H t ∼ tBβ,1−β. For each t the total integral at some value x has the interpretation of the probability that the time for the background L´evy process X ran at most up to x [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: SL implied volatility surface based on geometric Brownian motion; σ = 0.4, β = 0.7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: SL implied volatility surface based on a CGMY L´evy model, with C = 6.51, G = 18.75, M = 32.95, Y = 0.5757, β = 0.7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Time sections from Figure 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Convergence of the SL skew to the CGMY one as β tends to one, with T = 0.25 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_10.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Convergence of the SL model to the BS volatility as β tends to one, for T = 0.75 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    and Lipton, A

    Andersen, L. and Lipton, A. (2012). Asymptotic exponential L \'e vy processes and their volatility smile: survey and new results. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance , 16(1)

    work page 2012

  2. [2]

    Barndorff- N ielsen, O. E. (1997). Normal inverse G aussian distributions and stochastic volatility modelling. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics , 24:1--13

    work page 1997

  3. [3]

    M., and Scheffler, H

    Baumer, B., Meerschaert, M. M., and Scheffler, H. P. (2005). Space-time fractional derivative operator. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society , 133:2273--2282

    work page 2005

  4. [4]

    M., and Scheffler, H

    Becker-Kern, P., Meerschaert, M. M., and Scheffler, H. P. (2004). Limit theorems for coupled continuous time random walks. The Annals of Probability , 32:730--756

    work page 2004

  5. [5]

    Bertoin, J. (1996). L\'evy Processes . Cambridge University Press

    work page 1996

  6. [6]

    Bertoin, J. (1997). Subordinators: examples and applications. In Lectures on Probability Theory and Statistics , volume 1717, chapter 1, pages 1--91. Springer

    work page 1997

  7. [7]

    Carr., P., Geman, H., Madan, D., and Yor, M. (2001). The fine structure of asset returns: an empirical investigation. The Journal of Business , 75:305--332

    work page 2001

  8. [8]

    and del-Castillo-Negrete , D

    Cartea, A. and del-Castillo-Negrete , D. (2007). Fractional diffusion models of option prices in markets with jumps. Physica A , 374:749--763

    work page 2007

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    and Meyer-Brandis, T

    Cartea, A. and Meyer-Brandis, T. (2010). How duration between trades of underlying securities affects option prices. The Finance Review , 14:749--785

    2010

  2. [10]

    and Meerschaert, M

    Chakrabarty, A. and Meerschaert, M. M. (2011). Tempered stable laws as random walks limits. Statistics and Probability Letters , 81:989--997

    2011

  3. [11]

    and Tankov, P

    Cont, R. and Tankov, P. (2004). Financial Modelling with Jump Processes . Chapman & Hall

    2004

  4. [12]

    and Schachermayer, W

    Delbaen, F. and Schachermayer, W. (1994). A general version of the fundamental theorem of asset pricing. Mathematische Annalen , pages 463--520

    1994

  5. [13]

    and Meyer, P

    Dellacherie, C. and Meyer, P. A. (1978). Probability and Potential , volume 1. Elsevier

    1978

  6. [14]

    and Engle, R

    Dufour, A. and Engle, R. (2000). Time and the price impact of a trade. The Journal of Finance , 55:2467--2498

    2000

  7. [15]

    Engle, R. (2000). The econometrics of ultra-high frequency data. Econometrica , 68:1--22

    2000

  8. [16]

    and Russell, J

    Engle, R. and Russell, J. (1998). Autoregressive conditional duration: a new model for irregularly spaced transaction data. Econometrica , 66:1127--1162

    1998

  9. [17]

    E., Forde, M., and Jacquier, A

    Figueroa- L\'opez , J. E., Forde, M., and Jacquier, A. (2011). The large-time smile and skew for exponential L \'evy models. Working paper

    2011

  10. [18]

    and Torricelli, L

    Fries, C. and Torricelli, L. (2020). An analytical valuation framework for financial assets with trading suspensions. To appear in SIFN

    2020

  11. [19]

    C., and Pinter, A

    Gerhold, S., G\"ul\"um, I. C., and Pinter, A. (2016). Small-maturity asymptotics for at-the-money implied volatility slope in L \'evy models. Applied Mathematical Finance , 23:135--157

    2016

  12. [20]

    and Schumann, E

    Gilli, M. and Schumann, E. (2011). Numerical Methods and Optimization in Finance . Academic Press

    2011

  13. [21]

    J., Mathai, A

    Haubold, H. J., Mathai, A. M., and Saxena, R. K. (2011). Mittag-leffler functions and their applications. Journal of Applied Mathematics

    2011

  14. [22]

    Heston, S. L. (1993). A closed-form solution for options with stochastic volatility with applications to bond and currency options. The Review of Financial Studies , 6:327--343

    1993

  15. [23]

    Jacod, J. (1979). Calcul Stochastique et Probl\`emes de Martingales . Lecture notes in Mathematics. Springer

    1979

  16. [24]

    M., and Scheffler, H

    Jurlewicz, A., Kern, P., Meerschaert, M. M., and Scheffler, H. P. (2012). Fractional governing equations for coupled random walks. Computers and Mathematics with Applications , 64:3021--3036

    2012

  17. [25]

    Fluctuations of L \'e vy processes with Applications

    Kyprianou (2014). Fluctuations of L \'e vy processes with Applications . Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

    2014

  18. [26]

    Laskin, N. (2003). The fractional P oisson process. Communication in Nonlinear Science , 8:201--213

    2003

  19. [27]

    N., Meerschaert, M

    Leonenko, N. N., Meerschaert, M. M., Schilling, R. L., and Sikorskii, A. (2014). Correlation structure of time-changed L \'evy processes. Communications in Applied and Industrial Mathematics , 6

    2014

  20. [28]

    Lewis, A. (2001). A simple option formula for general jump-diffusion and other exponential L \'e vy processes. OptionCity.net

    2001

  21. [29]

    Luke, Y. L. (2012). The Special Functions and Their Approximations . Academy Press

    2012

  22. [30]

    Madan, D., Carr, P., and Chang, E. (1998). The variance gamma process and option pricing. European Finance Review , 2:79--105

    1998

  23. [31]

    Magdziarz, M. (2009). B lack- S choles formula in subdiffusive regime. Journal of Statistical Physics , 136:553--564

    2009

  24. [32]

    Mainardi, F., Gorenflo, R., and Scalas, E. (2004). A fractional generalization of the P oisson process. Vietnam Journal of Mathematics , 32:53--64

    2004

  25. [33]

    Mainardi, F., Raberto, M., Gorenflo, R., and Scalas, E. (2000). Fractional calculus and continuous-time finance II : the waiting time distribution. Physica A , 287:468--481

    2000

  26. [34]

    M., Nane, E., and Vellaisamy, P

    Meerschaert, M. M., Nane, E., and Vellaisamy, P. (2011). The fractional P oisson process and the inverse stable subordinator. Electronic Journal in Probability , 16:1600--1620

    2011

  27. [35]

    M., Nane, E., and Vellaisamy, P

    Meerschaert, M. M., Nane, E., and Vellaisamy, P. (2013). Transient anomalous sub-diffusions on bounded domains. Proceedings of the A merican M athematical S ociety , 141:699--710

    2013

  28. [36]

    Meerschaert, M. M. and Scalas, E. (2004). Coupled continuous time random walks in finance. Physica A , 41:114--118

    2004

  29. [37]

    Meerschaert, M. M. and Scheffler, H. P. (2004). Limit theorems for continuous-time random walks with infinite mean waiting times. Journal of Applied Probability , 41:623--638

    2004

  30. [38]

    Meerschaert, M. M. and Scheffler, H. P. (2008). Triangular array limits for continuous random walks. Stochastic Processes and their Applications , 118:1606--1633

    2008

  31. [39]

    Meerschaert, M. M. and Scheffler, H. P. (2010). Erratum to: `triangular array limits for continuous random walks'. Stochastic Processes and their Applications , 120:2520--2521

    2010

  32. [40]

    Meerschaert, M. M. and Straka, P. (2014). Semi- M arkov approach to continuous time random walk limit processes. The Annals of Probability , 42:1699--1723

    2014

  33. [41]

    and Tehranchi, M

    Rogers, L. and Tehranchi, M. (2010). Can the implied volatiliy move by parallel shifts? Finance and Stochastics , 14:235--248

    2010

  34. [42]

    Scalas, E., Gorenflo, R., and Mainardi, F. (2000). Fractional calculus and continuous-time finance. Physica A , 284:376--384

    2000

  35. [43]

    and Henry, B

    Straka, P. and Henry, B. I. (2011). Lagging and leading coupled continuous time random walks, renewal times and their joint limits. Stochastic processes and their applications , 121:324--336

    2011

  36. [44]

    Torricelli, L. (2020). Trade duration risk in subdiffusive financial models. Physica A , 541

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.