Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Rough kernel hedging

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that regularized hedging over an RKHS built from signature features has a unique global minimizer with an explicit analytic form.

desk verdict Solid kernel reduction for semimartingale hedging; the 'fully model-free' and 'provably convergent' claims outrun the theorems, but the Itô signature kernel SDE is a genuine contribution. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.09683 v2 pith:FKARLL3H submitted 2025-01-16 math.FA cs.LGstat.ML

Nicola Muca Cirone , Cristopher Salvi This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.FAcs.LGstat.ML MSC 46C0760L1060L20
keywords roughpathssignaturekernelsoperator-valuedhedgingrepresentertheoremreproducingkernelHilbertspacepath-dependentderivativesmodel-freefinance
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

This paper claims that a broad class of path-dependent hedging problems can be recast as regularized kernel regression and solved exactly, rather than approximated by training a network. The authors model market prices as geometric rough paths and use signature kernels, whose feature map converts the profit-and-loss integral into an inner product in a reproducing kernel Hilbert space. Under integrability conditions, a representer theorem gives existence and uniqueness of the global minimizer; for quadratic loss the optimal strategy is an explicit formula in the Gram matrix of the kernel. If the construction holds, the method is model-free, provably convergent, and able to ingest side information such as trading signals or news through the operator-valued kernel.

What carries the argument

The central object is the feature map $\Phi_X := \int_0^T K(X|_{[0,t]},\cdot)\,dX_t$, a rough integral of the operator-valued kernel $K$ against the market path $X$. It converts the profit-and-loss of any strategy $f\in H_K$ into the inner product $\langle f,\Phi_X\rangle_{H_K}$, which is what turns hedging into kernel regression. The signature kernel $K^{\mathrm{Strat}}_{\mathrm{sig}}$ on lead-lag lifted paths is the concrete kernel for which the paper verifies the controlled-lift bounds (14)--(15) needed for the rough integral to exist; its shuffle identity makes the associated RKHS dense in continuous path functionals. Theorems 1, 5 and 6 then supply the representer structure: existence, uniqueness, and the explicit form of the minimizer.

What would settle it

Take a non-signature kernel on paths, such as a Gaussian kernel evaluated on raw path increments, choose two Brownian sample paths, and compute the Riemann-sum approximation to $\Phi_X$ at decreasing mesh sizes; if the sums do not converge as the mesh goes to zero, the controlled-lift assumption fails and the method is not model-free for that kernel.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the regularized expected-loss minimization over an RKHS $H_\Phi$, with $\Phi_X = \int_0^T K(X|_{[0,t]},\cdot)\,dX_t$, admits a unique global minimizer whose form is explicit: in the quadratic case the optimal weights are given by equation (13), and for general p-losses by the fixed-point condition (28) of Theorem 5. The proof route is a representer theorem inherited from regularized kernel methods: the minimizer lies in the span of features $\Phi_X$, so the infinite-dimensional optimization reduces to solving a linear system in $L^2$ of the data measure. The paper also proves that for signature kernels the rough integral defining $\Phi_X$ is well defined for general geometric rough paths, which is what makes the setup model-free rather than tied to a particular stochastic model.

Load-bearing premise

The whole construction presupposes that the kernel is smooth enough along every path that the rough integral defining $\Phi_X$ exists and obeys bounds (14)--(15); this is verified in the paper only for signature kernels, under a condition that the lifted paths agree up to order $N-1$.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • With finite data, the optimal hedge is computed by forming the Gram matrix $K_\Phi(X,X)$ and applying formula (13), so the computational bottleneck is a matrix solve rather than network training.
  • For any p-loss satisfying Definition 3, the optimal strategy is characterized by condition (28), so the method extends beyond quadratic and exponential utility without changing the algorithm's core.
  • Extra information---news, signals, past decisions---enters through the operator-valued kernel as additional feature channels, matching the flexibility of deep hedging while keeping global optimality.
  • Because the setting is geometric rough paths, the same guarantees apply to high-dimensional, path-dependent payoffs without assuming a parametric market model.
  • Theorem 3 expresses the Ito signature kernel through Stratonovich integrals, which gives a concrete numerical route for Ito-type kernels via smoothing.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Extension left implicit: one could learn the kernel itself from data, for instance by tuning a neural signature kernel, and still keep the representer theorem valid for each fixed kernel; the optimization would then be over kernels, not over strategies.
  • The controlled-lift condition (22)--(23) is checkable on simulated rough paths, so a practitioner could validate whether a candidate kernel actually supports the rough integral before deployment.
  • The closed form (13) is differentiable in the observed paths, which suggests a scheme for computing hedging sensitivities by differentiating through the Gram matrix rather than by Monte Carlo.
  • The theory does not cover jumps: for markets with discontinuous prices the lead-lag construction and the geometric rough path assumption fail, so the model-free claim has a concrete boundary.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a signature-based kernel hedging framework for path-dependent derivatives. It models price dynamics as geometric rough paths, defines a feature map Phi_X as a rough integral of an operator-valued kernel against the price path, and shows that a regularized quadratic or general p-loss hedging problem over the RKHS reduces to a kernel regression problem. The main theoretical results are a rough-integral well-posedness theorem (Proposition 1, Theorem 4), a representer theorem giving existence and an implicit characterization of the minimizer (Theorem 1, Theorem 5), and an analytic expression for the optimal portfolio weights in the empirical-measure case (Corollary 1, Equation (13)). A short experiment on geometric Brownian motion illustrates convergence of the hedge positions toward the Black-Scholes delta as the training sample size grows.

Significance. If the controlled-lift assumptions hold, the reduction of path-dependent hedging to a finite-dimensional kernel problem is elegant and practically attractive, and the analytic form (13) is a useful departure from deep hedging. The paper correctly credits the representer theorem to De Vito et al. (2004) and Theorem 2 to Lyons-Nejad-Perez Arribas (2019); its genuinely new piece is the feature-map construction via rough integration (Proposition 1/Theorem 4) and the link to operator-valued kernels. The paper is honest in identifying the local-compactness limitation in Remark 3. However, the headline claims of a 'provably convergent algorithm' and a 'fully model-free approach' for general geometric rough paths are not established by the proofs as written; the constructive control condition in Lemma 4 only covers lifts that coincide up to order N-1, which is a substantive restriction for N>=3. The experimental section is illustrative only and does not quantitatively validate the general claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.3, Proposition 1; Appendix C, Lemma 4] The existence of the feature map Phi_X and the reduction to kernel regression rest on the controlled-lift assumption (14)-(15). The only constructive proof of such a lift is Lemma 4, which requires the signature lift used by the kernel and the integrator rough path to coincide up to order N-1. As the skeptic's analysis notes, for geometric rough paths with N>=3 (e.g., alpha=1/4), the level-2 area is genuinely extra data: a fixed level-1 path admits different geometric lifts with different level-2 terms. For m=1, inequality (14) demands O(|t-s|^{(N-1)alpha}) = O(|t-s|^{3/4}), whereas a level-2 mismatch between the kernel lift and the integrator is only O(|t-s|^{2alpha}) = O(|t-s|^{1/2}), which is strictly worse. Thus the required estimate fails in general. The paper's own Remark 12 calls the coincidence condition 'crucial' but only notes that it is automatic for N=2; no treatment is given for N>=3. This makes the abstract's claims of 'general geometric rough paths' and 'fully model-free' broader than the theorems support. Please either prove the controlled-lift property under weaker hypotheses, restrict the main claims to the semimartingale/N=2 setting, or add an explicit hypothesis and explain its scope.
  2. [Abstract and §1; §5] The abstract and introduction promise a 'scalable, provably convergent signature-based algorithm'. The paper does not actually define an algorithm with a convergence proof: Theorem 1 and Theorem 5 assert existence of a global minimizer and characterize it through a fixed-point equation, but no iterative procedure, rate of convergence, or discretization error analysis is provided. The numerical section (Section 5) reports only visual convergence for a single GBM example, with no error bars, no quantitative metrics (e.g., RMSE to the delta hedge, PnL variance), and no comparison to baseline methods. Consequently, the 'provably convergent' claim is not supported by the manuscript's content. I recommend either providing a concrete optimization algorithm with convergence guarantees (e.g., for the finite-dimensional linear system in Equation (13)) or revising the terminology to 'convergent in the limit of exact optimization' and adding a proper numerical study.
  3. [Theorem 1 and Theorem 5; Remark 3] Both representer theorems assume the base space X is locally compact and second countable; Remark 3 correctly notes that even the space of Brownian paths does not satisfy local compactness, and the paper falls back on empirical measures as collocation points. This is acceptable for the numerical method, but it means the 'theoretical guarantees' do not apply to the continuous infinite-dimensional setting advertised in the introduction. Please state clearly in the main text that the representer theorem is for empirical (or compactly supported) measures, and separate the well-posedness of the rough feature map (which holds for general rough paths under the controlled-lift condition) from the representer theorem's restrictive measure-theoretic hypotheses.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Definition 1 and throughout] There are several typos: 'reproducting' should be 'reproducing', 'trough' should be 'through', 'close subset' in Theorem 5 should be 'closed subset', and 'Ex' in equations should be 'E'. These should be corrected in a final pass.
  2. [Remark 4 and Equation (13)] The notation [Gamma_Q(Y)]_{i,j} and the matrix K_Phi(X,X) would benefit from a glossary: the index sets are not fully specified (i ranges over the d assets, j over the n empirical paths). Also, the dimension of the output of Gamma_Q is stated as R^{d x N} where N is already used for the rough-path truncation level; this conflicts with the use of N elsewhere and should be relabeled.
  3. [Section 5 and Figures 1-2] The figures lack axis labels, explicit definitions of the plotted quantities, and error bars or confidence bands. Since the claim is convergence to the delta hedge, a quantitative table of e.g. mean and standard deviation of the PnL for each N, or an L2 error against the delta position, would make the validation much more informative.
  4. [Appendix C, Lemma 4 proof] The final step of the proof writes 'Sig(tilde X)_{0,t} - Sig(tilde X)_{0,s} \otimes Sig(tilde X)_{s,t}^{<N-m}' and then bounds by O(|t-s|^{(N-m)alpha}). This is slightly compressed: the triangle inequality and the tail estimate of the signature should be spelled out to make the constant independent of m, as claimed.
  5. [Theorem 3 and Appendix F] The theorem is said to be 'of independent interest', but no numerical test of the Ito-signature-kernel SDE system is given, and Remark 14's Euler discretization is not used in the experiments. A brief numerical or complexity comment would help the reader assess the practical value of this result.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the representer theorems are imported from an external source, the feature-map construction is proved internally from rough-path theory, and the numerical validation uses an external benchmark.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation chain is not circular. The regularized hedging problem is transformed into kernel regression via a feature map Φ_X = ∫ K(X|[0,t], ·) dX_t, whose well-definedness is proved internally from rough-path theory (Proposition 1 and Theorem 4), and the resulting representer theorems (Theorem 1 and Theorem 5) are explicit corollaries of the external result of De Vito et al. (2004). The analytic solution and the explicit portfolio weights (equations (10)–(13)) are the standard kernel ridge regression solution for the constructed kernel K_Φ, not a quantity that was fitted to the target hedging outcome. Theorem 2 is explicitly presented as a reframing of [30, Thm. 4.7], and its proof says 'We just reframed [30, Thm. 4.7] in the language of RKHSs'; this is an honest attribution, not a disguised renaming. The use of signature kernels relies on the published, independent Goursat-PDE characterization of the signature kernel from [38]; although one author of the present paper is also an author of [38], that cited result is an external theorem about the signature kernel and does not assume the hedging conclusion. The empirical section validates the method against the analytically known Black-Scholes delta hedge on an independently sampled corpus, with no fitted constant being relabeled as a prediction. The controlled-lift assumption in Proposition 1 is indeed restrictive—and the paper itself notes in Remark 12 that the coincidence of the two lifts up to order N−1 is 'crucial' and trivially satisfied only for N=2—but a scope gap or unsupported generality in the 'fully model-free' claim is a correctness concern, not circularity, because the failure of an assumption does not make the theorem equivalent to its input. No prediction is obtained by construction from its own target, and no load-bearing argument reduces to an unverified self-citation. Therefore the appropriate finding is no significant circularity, with score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles, forces, or abstract entities are postulated; the feature map Phi and the Ito kernel SDE system are mathematical constructions built from existing objects. The free parameters listed are tuning and data-generating inputs, not fitted constants that the theory depends on.

free parameters (3)
  • Regularization coefficient lambda = not specified in experiments
    The optimization problem includes lambda > 0 as a penalty weight; the theory holds for any lambda, but the empirical results depend on its choice, which is not reported.
  • Time grid resolution M = 120 samples per path in experiments
    The Gram matrix is computed on a discrete grid T_M; the numerical accuracy and the stated convergence depend on M.
  • Volatility sigma = 0.2 in experiments
    The GBM experiment assumes sigma=0.2 to define the data-generating process; this is an input, not fitted.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Market prices are alpha-Holder geometric rough paths, and the integration is the rough integral.
    The whole framework is built on rough path theory; this is stated in Section 2 and Appendix A.
  • domain assumption The operator-valued kernel K admits a controlled lift satisfying the bounds in Proposition 1 (equations (14) and (15)).
    This assumption is stated in Proposition 1 and proved only for signature kernels in Appendix C under a coincidence condition on the two lifts.
  • domain assumption Local compactness and second countability of the base space X in Theorems 1 and 5.
    Stated in Theorem 1 and Remark 3 acknowledges that Brownian paths do not satisfy it; in practice the empirical measure is compactly supported.
  • standard math Continuous semimartingales can be canonically lifted to geometric rough paths; the lead-lag lift is geometric.
    Used in Section 3.1 and Theorem 2, citing Friz-Victoir and Lyons et al.
  • standard math Stone-Weierstrass approximation by signature linear functionals on compact sets of geometric rough paths.
    Used to justify universality of signature kernels, Section 3.
  • standard math Regularized kernel method theory (De Vito et al. 2004, Theorem 2) applies to the constructed feature map H_Phi.
    This external theorem is the backbone of Theorems 1 and 5.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Rough kernel hedging." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FKARLL3H

@misc{pith2026250109683,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Rough kernel hedging},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FKARLL3H}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.09683}
}
read the original abstract

Building on the functional-analytic framework of operator-valued kernels and un-truncated signature kernels, we propose a scalable, provably convergent signature-based algorithm for a broad class of high-dimensional, path-dependent hedging problems. We make minimal assumptions about market dynamics by modelling them as general geometric rough paths, yielding a fully model-free approach. Furthermore, through a representer theorem, we provide theoretical guarantees on the existence and uniqueness of a global minimum for the resulting optimization problem and derive an analytic solution under highly general loss functions. Similar to the popular deep hedging approach, but in a more rigorous fashion, our method can also incorporate additional features via the underlying operator-valued kernel, such as trading signals, news analytics, and past hedging decisions, closely aligning with true machine-learning practice.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Signature Reconstruction from Randomized Signatures

    math.CA 2025-02 reject novelty 8.0 of 10

    Depth-two exponential randomized signatures are claimed to reconstruct up to d^(N+1) signature features from hidden dimension N, based on new linear independence results for tree-like vector fields.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    In: ACM International Conference on AI in Finance (2020)

    Arribas, I.P., Salvi, C., Szpruch, L.: Sig-sdes model for quantitative finance. In: ACM International Conference on AI in Finance (2020)

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    Mathematics and financial economics 11, 215–239 (2017)

    Bank, P., Soner, H.M., Voß, M.: Hedging with temporary price impact. Mathematics and financial economics 11, 215–239 (2017)

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.10354 (2024)

    Barancikova, B., Huang, Z., Salvi, C.: Sigdiffusions: Score-based diffusion models for long time series via log-signature embeddings. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.10354 (2024)

    arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    The Signature of a Rough Path: Uniqueness

    Boedihardjo, H., Geng, X., Lyons, T., Yang, D.: The signature of a rough path: Unique- ness (2015). URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1406.7871

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  5. [5]

    Quantitative Finance 19(8), 1271–1291 (2019)

    Buehler, H., Gonon, L., Teichmann, J., Wood, B.: Deep hedging. Quantitative Finance 19(8), 1271–1291 (2019)

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Analysis and Applications 04(04), 377–408 (2006)

    CARMELI, C., DE VITO, E., TOIGO, A.: Vector valued reproducing kernel hilbert spaces of integrable functions and mercer theorem. Analysis and Applications 04(04), 377–408 (2006). DOI 10.1142/S0219530506000838. URL https://doi.org/10.1142/ S0219530506000838

    doi:10.1142/s0219530506000838 2006

  7. [7]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.06583 (2024)

    Cass, T., Salvi, C.: Lecture notes on rough paths and applications to machine learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.06583 (2024)

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Rough path theory

    Chevyrev, I.: Rough path theory (2024). DOI 10.48550/arXiv.2402.10331. URL http: //arxiv.org/abs/2402.10331. ArXiv:2402.10331 [math]

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.10331 2024

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    In: Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML’23

    Cirone, N.M., Lemercier, M., Salvi, C.: Neural signature kernels as infinite-width-depth- limits of controlled resnets. In: Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML’23. JMLR.org (2023) Rough kernel hedging 35

    2023

  2. [10]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.19047 (2024)

    Cirone, N.M., Orvieto, A., Walker, B., Salvi, C., Lyons, T.: Theoretical foundations of deep selective state-space models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.19047 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  3. [11]

    In: 2021 IEEE International Conference on Cyber Security and Resilience (CSR), pp

    Cochrane, T., Foster, P., Chhabra, V., Lemercier, M., Lyons, T., Salvi, C.: Sk-tree: a systematic malware detection algorithm on streaming trees via the signature kernel. In: 2021 IEEE International Conference on Cyber Security and Resilience (CSR), pp. 35–40. IEEE (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    Journal of Machine Learning Research 5, 1363–1390 (2004)

    De Vito, E., Rosasco, L., Caponnetto, A., Piana, M., Verri, A.: Some properties of regularized kernel methods. Journal of Machine Learning Research 5, 1363–1390 (2004)

    2004

  5. [13]

    IEEE BITS the Information Theory Magazine (2023)

    Fermanian, A., Lyons, T., Morrill, J., Salvi, C.: New directions in the applications of rough path theory. IEEE BITS the Information Theory Magazine (2023)

    2023

  6. [14]

    Stochastic Processes and their Applications 126(9), 2593–2614 (2016)

    Flint, G., Hambly, B., Lyons, T.: Discretely sampled signals and the rough hoff process. Stochastic Processes and their Applications 126(9), 2593–2614 (2016)

    2016

  7. [15]

    Universitext

    Friz, P., Hairer, M.: A Course on Rough Paths: With an Introduction to Regularity Structures. Universitext. Springer International Publishing (2020). URL https:// books.google.co.uk/books?id=78TnDwAAQBAJ

    2020

  8. [16]

    Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics

    Friz, P., Victoir, N.: Multidimensional Stochastic Processes as Rough Paths: Theory and Applications. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press (2010). URL https://books.google.com.na/books?id=CVgwLatxfGsC

    2010

  9. [17]

    Stochastics An International Journal of Probability and Stochastic Processes 86(1), 147–185 (2014)

    Goutte, S., Oudjane, N., Russo, F.: Variance optimal hedging for continuous time ad- ditive processes and applications. Stochastics An International Journal of Probability and Stochastic Processes 86(1), 147–185 (2014)

    2014

  10. [18]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.14258 (2023)

    Hoglund, M., Ferrucci, E., Hern´ andez, C., Gonzalez, A.M., Salvi, C., Sanchez- Betancourt, L., Zhang, Y.: A neural rde approach for continuous-time non-markovian stochastic control problems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.14258 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.13587 (2024)

    Holberg, C., Salvi, C.: Exact gradients for stochastic spiking neural networks driven by rough signals. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.13587 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.01479 (2023)

    Horvath, B., Lemercier, M., Liu, C., Lyons, T., Salvi, C.: Optimal stopping via distri- bution regression: a higher rank signature approach. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.01479 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Hubalek, F., Kallsen, J., Krawczyk, L.: Variance-optimal hedging for processes with stationary independent increments (2006)

    2006

  14. [22]

    The journal of Finance 49(3), 851– 889 (1994)

    Hutchinson, J.M., Lo, A.W., Poggio, T.: A nonparametric approach to pricing and hedging derivative securities via learning networks. The journal of Finance 49(3), 851– 889 (1994)

    1994

  15. [23]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2024)

    Issa, Z., Horvath, B., Lemercier, M., Salvi, C.: Non-adversarial training of neural sdes with signature kernel scores. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2024)

    2024

  16. [24]

    Jeanblanc, M., Mania, M., Santacroce, M., Schweizer, M.: Mean-variance hedging via stochastic control and bsdes for general semimartingales (2012)

    2012

  17. [25]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 (2019)

    Kidger, P., Bonnier, P., Perez Arribas, I., Salvi, C., Lyons, T.: Deep signature trans- forms. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 (2019)

    2019

  18. [26]

    In: International Conference on Machine Learning

    Lemercier, M., Salvi, C., Cass, T., Bonilla, E.V., Damoulas, T., Lyons, T.: Siggpde: Scaling sparse gaussian processes on sequential data. In: International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR (2021)

    2021

  19. [27]

    In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pp

    Lemercier, M., Salvi, C., Damoulas, T., Bonilla, E., Lyons, T.: Distribution regression for sequential data. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pp. 3754–3762. PMLR (2021)

    2021

  20. [28]

    Ecole d’´ et´ e de Probabilit´ es de Saint-Flour XXXIV pp

    Lyons, T., Caruana, M., L´ evy, T.: Differential equations driven by rough paths. Ecole d’´ et´ e de Probabilit´ es de Saint-Flour XXXIV pp. 1–93 (2004)

    2004

  21. [29]

    Lecture Notes in Mathe- matics

    Lyons, T., Caruana, M., L´ evy, T.: Differential Equations Driven by Rough Paths: Ecole d’Et´ e de Probabilit´ es de Saint-Flour XXXIV-2004. Lecture Notes in Mathe- matics. Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2007). URL https://books.google.it/books?id= hOm5BQAAQBAJ

    2007

  22. [30]

    URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.00711

    Lyons, T., Nejad, S., Arribas, I.P.: Nonparametric pricing and hedging of exotic deriva- tives (2019). URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.00711

    2019 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Applied Mathematical Finance 27(6), 457–494 (2020)

    Lyons, T., Nejad, S., Perez Arribas, I.: Non-parametric pricing and hedging of exotic derivatives. Applied Mathematical Finance 27(6), 457–494 (2020)

    2020

  24. [32]

    Oxford University Press (2002) 36 Nicola Mu¸ ca Cirone, Cristopher Salvi

    Lyons, T., Qian, Z.: System control and rough paths. Oxford University Press (2002) 36 Nicola Mu¸ ca Cirone, Cristopher Salvi

    2002

  25. [33]

    Revista Matem´ atica Iberoamericana 14(2), 215–310 (1998)

    Lyons, T.J.: Differential equations driven by rough signals. Revista Matem´ atica Iberoamericana 14(2), 215–310 (1998)

    1998

  26. [34]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.18477 (2024)

    Manten, G., Casolo, C., Ferrucci, E., Mogensen, S.W., Salvi, C., Kilbertus, N.: Signature kernel conditional independence tests in causal discovery for stochastic processes. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.18477 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    In: International Conference on Machine Learning, pp

    Morrill, J., Salvi, C., Kidger, P., Foster, J.: Neural rough differential equations for long time series. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 7829–7838. PMLR (2021)

    2021

  28. [36]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.11738 (2024)

    Pannier, A., Salvi, C.: A path-dependent pde solver based on signature kernels. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.11738 (2024)

    2024

  29. [37]

    Mathematical Finance: An International Journal of Mathematics, Statistics and Financial Economics 20(4), 597–615 (2010)

    Rogers, L.C., Singh, S.: The cost of illiquidity and its effects on hedging. Mathematical Finance: An International Journal of Mathematics, Statistics and Financial Economics 20(4), 597–615 (2010)

    2010

  30. [38]

    SIAM Journal on Mathematics of Data Science 3(3), 873–899 (2021)

    Salvi, C., Cass, T., Foster, J., Lyons, T., Yang, W.: The signature kernel is the solution of a Goursat PDE. SIAM Journal on Mathematics of Data Science 3(3), 873–899 (2021)

    2021

  31. [39]

    Journal of Algebra 634, 911–938 (2023)

    Salvi, C., Diehl, J., Lyons, T., Preiss, R., Reizenstein, J.: A structure theorem for streamed information. Journal of Algebra 634, 911–938 (2023)

    2023

  32. [40]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 34, 16635–16647 (2021)

    Salvi, C., Lemercier, M., Liu, C., Horvath, B., Damoulas, T., Lyons, T.: Higher order kernel mean embeddings to capture filtrations of stochastic processes. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 34, 16635–16647 (2021)

    2021

  33. [41]

    The Annals of Applied Probability 5(2), 327–355 (1995)

    Soner, H.M., Shreve, S.E., Cvitanic, J.: There is no nontrivial hedging portfolio for option pricing with transaction costs. The Annals of Applied Probability 5(2), 327–355 (1995)

    1995

  34. [42]

    Cass, J.P.: A fubini type theorem for rough integration

    Thomas R. Cass, J.P.: A fubini type theorem for rough integration. Rev. Mat. Iberoam. 39 2, 761–802 (2023). DOI 10.4171/RMI/1409

    2023 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.