Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 3 cited by

Simulating integrated Volterra square-root processes and Volterra Heston models via Inverse Gaussian

T0 review · 2 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read An inverse-Gaussian one-step discretization of integrated Volterra square-root processes is proven to converge weakly, with non-decreasing simulated paths and fast numerics even for negative Hurst indices.

desk verdict A genuinely useful IG-based simulation scheme for integrated Volterra square-root processes with a real convergence proof, but the advertised 'any L1 kernel' scope is false and needs qualification before it is publishable. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.19885 v1 pith:TSJNLGOF submitted 2025-04-28 q-fin.MF math.PR

Eduardo Abi Jaber , Elie Attal This is my paper · ORCID
classification q-fin.MFmath.PR MSC 60H2060H3591G2060G44
keywords integratedVolterrasquare-rootprocessHestonmodelInverseGaussiandistributionweakconvergenceSkorokhodJ1topologyroughvolatilitynonnegativity-preservingkernelsstochasticequations
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 introduces a simulation scheme, iVi (integrated Volterra implicit), for the integrated Volterra square-root process $U_t=\int_0^t V_s\,ds$, the object that drives Volterra Heston models. The scheme discretizes the dynamics of $U$ directly, using one Inverse Gaussian draw per time step, and is designed for $L^1$ kernels with singularities such as the fractional kernel $t^{H-1/2}$ with $H\in(-1/2,1/2]$. The authors prove that the piecewise constant processes produced by the scheme are tight in the Skorokhod $J_1$ topology and that every accumulation point solves the original integrated Volterra equation with the correct martingale structure; under weak uniqueness this gives weak convergence. They also prove the scheme is well defined, keeps the simulated integrated process non-decreasing, and report that numerically a handful of time steps already matches reference option prices, with convergence accelerating as the Hurst index approaches $-1/2$.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing reformulation writes the discrete scheme as a stochastic Volterra equation with a measure kernel, $U^n_t=\int_0^{\lfloor nt/T\rfloor T/n}g_0(s)\,ds+\int_{[0,t]}(bU^n_{t-s}+cZ^n_{t-s})K^n(ds)$ with $K^n=\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}k_i^n\delta_{t_i^n}$, which turns the non-Markovian recursion into a convolution equation whose stability can be studied by $L^1$ arguments. The Inverse Gaussian law itself comes from the Dambis-Dubins-Schwarz representation: writing $Z$ as a time-changed Brownian motion, the implicit step $(1-bk_0)\hat U=\alpha_i+ck_0\tilde W_{\hat U}$ identifies $\hat U_{i,i+1}$ as a first passage time, whose distribution is Inverse Gaussian. Well-definedness is carried by the requirement that the integrated kernel $\bar K(t)=\int_0^{T/n}K(t+s)\,ds$ be non-increasing and preserve nonnegativity, a condition verified for completely monotone kernels.

What would settle it

Choose a nonnegative $L^1$ kernel with a singularity that is not completely monotone, for example a truncated or shifted version of $t^{-1/2}$ whose integrated average $\bar K$ has an increasing segment, and run Algorithm 1 on a coarse grid with constant $g_0$, computing the $\alpha_i$ recursively; if any $\alpha_i<0$ appears, the well-definedness claim (Theorem 1.3) fails as stated, while finding no such kernel would support widening the assumption to all $L^1$ kernels.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At each step $i$, Algorithm 1 computes $\alpha_i=\int_{t_i}^{t_{i+1}}g_0(s)\,ds+\sum_{j<i}k_{i-j}(b\hat U_{j,j+1}+c\hat Z_{j,j+1})$ from integrated kernel weights $k_\ell=\int_0^{T/n}K(\ell T/n+s)\,ds$, then samples $\hat U_{i,i+1}$ from an Inverse Gaussian law with mean $\alpha_i/(1-bk_0)$ and shape $(\alpha_i/(c k_0))^2$, and sets $\hat Z_{i,i+1}=((1-bk_0)\hat U_{i,i+1}-\alpha_i)/(c k_0)$. The paper's central result is that the piecewise constant processes $U^n_t=\sum_{i<nt/T}\hat U_{i,i+1}$ and $Z^n_t=\sum_{i<nt/T}\hat Z_{i,i+1}$ are $J_1$-tight and any accumulation point $(U,Z)$ satisfies $U_t=\int_0^t g_0(s)\,ds+\int_0^tK(t-s)(bU_s+cZ_s)\,ds$ with $Z$ a continuous square-integrable martingale whose quadratic variation is $U$. When the law of the limit is unique, the scheme converges weakly (Theorem 2.2 and Corollary 2.3). The proof also shows $\alpha_i\ge 0$ and that $\hat U$ is non-decreasing, so no clipping is needed.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that the kernel's average over each time step, $\bar K(t)=\int_0^{T/n}K(t+s)\,ds$, is a non-increasing and nonnegative function; this is verified for completely monotone kernels, but not for every $L^1$ kernel with a singularity that the paper claims to handle, and if it fails the $\alpha_i$ can become negative and the Inverse Gaussian sampling breaks down.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The scheme applies to $L^1$ kernels with singularities, including the fractional kernel with negative Hurst index, without reconstructing the instantaneous variance $V$.
  • Under weak uniqueness of solutions, the discretized processes converge weakly to the integrated Volterra square-root process, so option prices computed from the scheme inherit the model's limit behavior.
  • The simulated integrated process is non-decreasing by construction, eliminating the need for clipping or projection steps that other schemes require.
  • For the fractional kernel, numerical convergence improves as $H$ decreases toward $-1/2$, the opposite of existing schemes, and one time step already approximates the limiting Inverse Gaussian regime.
  • Because the scheme needs very few steps, it mitigates the quadratic cost in the number of steps inherent to non-Markovian simulation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Extending the nonnegativity-preservation assumption from $\bar K$ to broader classes than completely monotone kernels would widen the proven scope; Proposition 1.4 already suggests Bernstein representations with signed measures of locally bounded variation may suffice.
  • The single-step accuracy as $H\to -1/2$ suggests a testable closed-form approximation: compare the one-step iVi distribution with the explicit Inverse Gaussian limit law established for the continuous process, and measure the gap as a function of $H+1/2$.
  • Eliminating the drift term $bU$ via the resolvent kernel $R_b$, as the paper sketches, should remove an additional discretization bias; a numerical comparison of the original and resolvent-based versions would quantify that bias.
  • The finite-$n$ martingale property of $\hat Z$ suggests the scheme could be used as a control variate or as the basis of a multilevel estimator, since the bias in $\langle Z^n\rangle$ versus $U^n$ is explicit.
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

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper introduces an Inverse-Gaussian-based implicit Euler-type scheme (the iVi scheme) for the integrated Volterra square-root process U_{0,t} and for pricing in Volterra Heston models. The increment bU_{i,i+1} is sampled from an Inverse Gaussian law whose parameters are formed from integrated kernel quantities, and bZ_{i,i+1} is set by the implicit relation, preserving the non-decreasing property of U. The main theoretical results are: Theorem 1.3, showing well-definedness and nonnegativity under an assumption on the integrated kernel; and Theorem 2.2, proving J1-tightness of the piecewise-constant scheme and characterizing every accumulation point as a solution of the limiting stochastic Volterra equation, with weak convergence following under weak uniqueness (Corollary 2.3). The numerical section reports fast convergence for fractional kernels, including negative Hurst indices, with reference values from Fourier inversion and Monte Carlo noise floors.

Significance. If the claims are read in their formal scope, this is a substantial contribution: a simple, hyperparameter-free scheme with a genuine convergence proof under an explicit kernel condition, together with a self-contained stability theorem for stochastic Volterra equations with measure-valued kernels. The martingale property of the discretized Z and the identification of its limiting quadratic variation are proved in detail, and the numerical study is careful, using Fourier-inversion reference values and reporting Monte Carlo noise levels. However, the advertised L1-kernel generality is not supported by the formal assumptions and is in fact false as stated; the scope must be narrowed or the scheme must be modified before the paper can be accepted.

major comments (2)
  1. [Introduction, Theorem 1.3, Assumption 2.1] The paper advertises in the abstract and introduction that the scheme simulates U in (0.3) for any kernel K in L1([0,T]). The formal well-definedness result, Theorem 1.3, requires the integrated kernel \bar K to be non-increasing and to preserve nonnegativity (Assumption 2.1), and this property is only verified in Proposition 1.4 for kernels with the completely monotone-type representation (1.9). The advertised L1 claim is false. A concrete counterexample is obtained with T=5/4, n=5, \Delta=1/4, K(t)=1_{[0,1]}(t), b=0, c=1, g0\equiv 1. Then (0.5) gives k0=k1=k2=k3=1/4 and k4=0, and writing X_i=\hat U_{i,i+1} the recursion (0.6)-(0.8) yields \alpha_0=1/4, \alpha_1=X_0, \alpha_2=X_1, \alpha_3=X_2 and \alpha_4=\Delta+X_3-X_0. On the positive-probability event \{X_0>3,\ X_1<0.1,\ X_2<0.1,\ X_3<0.1\} we have \alpha_4<0, so the Inverse Gaussian parameters in (0.7) are invalid at the last step of Algorithm 1. The scheme is therefore undefined for a nonnegative, non-increasing L1 kernel. This does not contradict Theorem 1.3 as stated, but it contradicts the paper's advertised scope. The authors should either restrict all claims to kernels satisfying Assumption 2.1 (and state the verified examples), or modify the scheme, for example by replacing \alpha_i with \alpha_i^+, and prove well-definedness for that modified scheme.
  2. [Proposition 1.4] Proposition 1.4 is the bridge that turns Theorem 1.3 into a usable statement for fractional and exponential kernels, so its proof needs to be correct as written. Two issues need attention. First, the displayed formula for \nu(dx) has a sign error: when K(t)=\int e^{-xt}\mu(dx), Fubini gives \bar K(t)=\int e^{-xt}(1-e^{-xT/n})/x\,\mu(dx), so the exponent in the paper's formula should be e^{-xT/n}, not e^{xT/n}. Second, the statement allows \mu to be a measure of locally bounded variation, which may be signed; it is not automatic that Alfonsi (2025, Theorem 2.11) applies to such \nu. Please clarify whether \mu is assumed nonnegative (as in the completely monotone case of Example 1.5) or supply the additional argument needed for signed \mu. This is important because the numerical examples rely on this proposition for the fractional and shifted-fractional kernels.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Section 5.2, Lemma 5.4 proof] In the proof of Lemma 5.4, the sentence 'In virtue of Assumption 2.1, \bar K^n is non-decreasing and therefore (k_i^n) is a non-decreasing sequence' should read 'non-increasing' in both places. The subsequent inequality uses k_{j-l}^n-k_{i-l}^n \ge 0, which is exactly what the non-increasing case gives; as printed the sign is inconsistent.
  2. [Remark 1.7] The discretized Riccati equation in Remark 1.7 contains a typo: the term 'bk0\psi2(\Delta_i)' should be 'bk0\psi(\Delta_i)', and the quadratic term should be written as k0 c^2/2 \psi(\Delta_i)^2. As printed, the expression is dimensionally inconsistent and does not match the quadratic equation (1.14).
  3. [General presentation] The paper repeatedly uses the phrase 'any kernel K in L1([0,T])' in the abstract and introduction. Even after the main scope is corrected in Theorem 1.3, the abstract and the 'Relation to the Literature' paragraph should be reworded so that the formal assumption (integrated kernel non-increasing and nonnegativity-preserving) is aligned with the claimed scope.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the iVi scheme is derived from an explicit Euler-type discretization of the increment dynamics, and its convergence proof is independent of the target distribution.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. Algorithm 1 is constructed by discretizing Proposition 1.1's exact increment dynamics (1.2), with G_{t_i}(t_{i+1}) approximated by α_i in (1.5) and the final term by k0(bU+cZ) in (1.6). The Inverse Gaussian law is not fitted: it is the first-passage law of the drifted Brownian motion in (1.7), and Remark 1.7 only shows consistency with the right-endpoint discretized Riccati equation. Well-definedness (Theorem 1.3) is proved from explicit assumptions on the integrated kernel (Assumption 2.1) via the continuous-time process A; this is a substantive proof, not a renaming. The convergence theorem (Theorem 2.2) is obtained from C-tightness (Lemma 5.7), martingale estimates (Lemmas 5.1-5.2), and a stability lemma for measure-kernel convolutions (Lemma 5.9), none of which presumes the limit equation. Weak uniqueness is imported from Abi Jaber (2021); this is a self-citation, but it is a parameter-free published theorem whose assumptions do not include the convergence of this scheme, so it is independent support rather than circularity. The H -> -1/2 Inverse Gaussian citation is used only to explain a numerical observation, not to prove convergence. Numerical comparisons against Riccati/Fourier reference values are external benchmarks, so no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The reader's concern about the L1-generality claim and the 'non-decreasing' typo in Lemma 5.4 are correctness/consistency issues, not circularity. Hence no circular step is exhibited.

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

No free parameters are fitted; all inputs are model parameters or kernel integrals. The scheme relies on standard stochastic calculus facts and on the domain assumptions listed; none of the assumptions are introduced ad hoc to force a desired output.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Assumption 2.1: the integrated kernel K̄ is non-increasing and preserves nonnegativity, and ḡ0 is non-decreasing and nonnegative.
    Needed for Theorem 1.3 to ensure α_i ≥ 0 and bU non-decreasing. The property is inherited from complete monotonicity of K via Proposition 1.4.
  • domain assumption Weak uniqueness of solutions to (0.3) for the limiting process; for completely monotone kernels this follows from Abi Jaber (2021).
    Corollary 2.3 needs uniqueness to convert tightness into weak convergence.
  • domain assumption The integrated formulation (0.3) and stochastic Fubini theorems hold for L1 kernels, as established by Abi Jaber (2021) and Jusselin and Rosenbaum (2020).
    Used throughout the derivation and convergence proof.
  • standard math Alfonsi's nonnegativity-preserving kernel framework (Definition 1.2 and Proposition 4.3).
    Imported from Alfonsi (2025) and used in the proof of Theorem 1.3.
  • standard math Dambis-Dubins-Schwarz time-change theorem.
    Used to represent Z as a time-changed Brownian motion, leading to the IG passage time.
  • standard math Inverse Gaussian distribution properties and sampling algorithm (Appendix A).
    Used for simulation and moment estimates in Lemma 5.1.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Simulating integrated Volterra square-root processes and Volterra Heston models via Inverse Gaussian." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TSJNLGOF

@misc{pith2026250419885,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Simulating integrated Volterra square-root processes and Volterra Heston models via Inverse Gaussian},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TSJNLGOF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.19885}
}
abstract

We introduce a novel simulation scheme, iVi (integrated Volterra implicit), for integrated Volterra square-root processes and Volterra Heston models based on the Inverse Gaussian distribution. The scheme is designed to handle $L^1$ kernels with singularities by relying solely on integrated kernel quantities, and it preserves the non-decreasing property of the integrated process. We establish weak convergence of the iVi scheme by reformulating it as a stochastic Volterra equation with a measure kernel and proving a stability result for this class of equations. Numerical results demonstrate that convergence is achieved with very few time steps. Remarkably, for the rough fractional kernel, unlike existing schemes, convergence seems to improve as the Hurst index $H$ decreases and approaches $-1/2$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.19885 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Implied volatility slice for call options of the hyper-rough Heston model ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. presents sample paths of  U, b Zb  generated using the iVi scheme in Algorithm 1, along with the discrete derivative Vbi = Ubi,i+1 ti+1 − ti for the fractional kernel K(t) = t H−1/2/Γ(H + 1/2) with H ∈ {0.1, −0.1, −0.4}. We can clearly observe the impact of the Hurst index H on the sample paths of the process. If H > 0, the process U is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure, and Vb serves as a… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Errors on Laplace transform of Uˆ T in terms of the number of time steps for the four cases with T = 1 and 1 million sample paths. Plain line for the iVi scheme, blue dotted line for the benchmark [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: ATM Call options on S: error in prices in terms of number of time steps for the four cases with 1 million sample paths. Plain line for the iVi scheme, blue dotted line for the benchmark. To illustrate the impact of the Hurst index H on the behavior of the scheme, we se…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Simulation of square-root processes made simple: applications to the Heston model

    q-fin.MF 2024-12 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The iVi scheme simulates the integrated square-root process via an Inverse Gaussian law, preserving non-negativity and first moments, and shows high accuracy in Heston tests with as few as one time step.

  2. Diffusion bridge with randomized initial and terminal times and its application to fish migration

    q-bio.PE 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

    A well-posed CIR bridge with time-changed random initial and terminal times models water-temperature-driven Ayu migration and is explored on fish-count and eDNA data.

  3. CIR bridge for modeling of fish migration on sub-hourly scale

    math.PR 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A CIR bridge with closed-form mean and variance is proposed and fitted to sub-hourly ayu migration counts, capturing the observed bursty intermittency.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Lifting the H eston model

    Eduardo Abi Jaber. Lifting the H eston model. Quantitative finance, 19 0 (12): 0 1995--2013, 2019

    work page 1995

  2. [2]

    Weak existence and uniqueness for affine stochastic V olterra equations with L1 -kernels

    Eduardo Abi Jaber. Weak existence and uniqueness for affine stochastic V olterra equations with L1 -kernels. Bernoulli, 27 0 (3): 0 1583--1615, 2021

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Simulation of square-root processes made simple: applications to the H eston model

    Eduardo Abi Jaber. Simulation of square-root processes made simple: applications to the H eston model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.11264, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    Reconciling rough volatility with jumps

    Eduardo Abi Jaber and Nathan De Carvalho. Reconciling rough volatility with jumps. SIAM Journal on Financial Mathematics, 15 0 (3): 0 785--823, 2024

    2024

  5. [5]

    Multifactor approximation of rough volatility models

    Eduardo Abi Jaber and Omar El Euch. Multifactor approximation of rough volatility models. SIAM journal on financial mathematics, 10 0 (2): 0 309--349, 2019

    2019

  6. [6]

    Volatility models in practice: R ough, P ath-dependent or M arkovian? arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.03345, 2024

    Eduardo Abi Jaber and Shaun Xiaoyuan Li. Volatility models in practice: R ough, P ath-dependent or M arkovian? arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.03345, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Affine V olterra processes

    Eduardo Abi Jaber, Martin Larsson, and Sergio Pulido. Affine V olterra processes. The Annals of Applied Probability, 29 0 (5): 0 3155--3200, 2019

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    State spaces of multifactor approximations of nonnegative V olterra processes

    Eduardo Abi Jaber, Christian Bayer, and Simon Breneis. State spaces of multifactor approximations of nonnegative V olterra processes. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.17526, 2024

    arXiv 2024

Show all 34 references
  1. [9]

    From H yper R oughness to J umps as H -1/2

    Eduardo Abi Jaber, Elie Attal, and Mathieu Rosenbaum. From H yper R oughness to J umps as H -1/2 . arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.16985, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Nonnegativity preserving convolution kernels

    Aur \'e lien Alfonsi. Nonnegativity preserving convolution kernels. A pplication to S tochastic V olterra E quations in closed convex domains and their approximation. Stochastic Processes and their Applications, 181, 2025

    2025

  3. [11]

    Approximation of S tochastic V olterra E quations with kernels of completely monotone type

    Aur \'e lien Alfonsi and Ahmed Kebaier. Approximation of S tochastic V olterra E quations with kernels of completely monotone type. Mathematics of Computation, 93 0 (346): 0 643--677, 2024

    2024

  4. [12]

    Efficient simulation of the H eston stochastic volatility model

    Leif BG Andersen. Efficient simulation of the H eston stochastic volatility model. Available at SSRN 946405, 2007

    2007

  5. [13]

    Efficient option pricing in the rough H eston model using weak simulation schemes

    Christian Bayer and Simon Breneis. Efficient option pricing in the rough H eston model using weak simulation schemes. Quantitative Finance, 24 0 (9): 0 1247--1261, 2024

    2024

  6. [14]

    Convergence of probability measures

    Patrick Billingsley. Convergence of probability measures. John Wiley & Sons, 2nd edition, 1999

    1999

  7. [15]

    Dawson and Klaus Fleischmann

    Donald A. Dawson and Klaus Fleischmann. A super- B rownian motion with a single point catalyst. Stochastic Processes and their Applications, 49 0 (1): 0 3--40, 1994

    1994

  8. [16]

    The characteristic function of rough H eston models

    Omar El Euch and Mathieu Rosenbaum. The characteristic function of rough H eston models. Mathematical Finance, 29 0 (1): 0 3--38, 2019

    2019

  9. [17]

    The large-maturity smile for the H eston model

    Martin Forde and Antoine Jacquier. The large-maturity smile for the H eston model. Finance and Stochastics, 15 0 (4): 0 755--780, 2011

    2011

  10. [18]

    Efficient simulation of affine forward variance models

    Jim Gatheral. Efficient simulation of affine forward variance models. Risk, 2022

    2022

  11. [19]

    Volterra integral and functional equations

    Gustaf Gripenberg, Stig-Olof Londen, and Olof Staffans. Volterra integral and functional equations. Number 34. Cambridge University Press, 1990

    1990

  12. [20]

    Does the term-structure of equity A t-the- M oney skew really follow a power law? Risk, 2023

    Julien Guyon and Mehdi El Amrani. Does the term-structure of equity A t-the- M oney skew really follow a power law? Risk, 2023

    2023

  13. [21]

    A closed-form solution for options with stochastic volatility with applications to bond and currency options

    Steven L Heston. A closed-form solution for options with stochastic volatility with applications to bond and currency options. The review of financial studies, 6 0 (2): 0 327--343, 1993

    1993

  14. [22]

    Shiryaev

    Jean Jacod and Albert N. Shiryaev. Limit theorems for stochastic processes, volume 288 of Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften. Springer, 2nd edition, 2013

    2013

  15. [23]

    Rough fractional diffusions as scaling limits of nearly unstable heavy tailed H awkes processes

    Thibault Jaisson and Mathieu Rosenbaum. Rough fractional diffusions as scaling limits of nearly unstable heavy tailed H awkes processes. Annals of Applied Probability, 26 0 (5): 0 2860--2882, 2016

    2016

  16. [24]

    No-arbitrage implies power-law market impact and rough volatility

    Paul Jusselin and Mathieu Rosenbaum. No-arbitrage implies power-law market impact and rough volatility. Mathematical Finance, 30 0 (4): 0 1309--1336, 2020

    2020

  17. [25]

    Weak approximation of CKLS and CEV processes by discrete random variables

    Gytenis Lileika and Vigirdas Mackevi c ius. Weak approximation of CKLS and CEV processes by discrete random variables. Lithuanian Mathematical Journal, 60: 0 208--224, 2020

    2020

  18. [26]

    On Spatially Irregular Ordinary Differential Equations and a Pathwise Volatility Modelling Framework

    Ryan McCrickerd. On Spatially Irregular Ordinary Differential Equations and a Pathwise Volatility Modelling Framework. Ph.d. thesis, Imperial College London, 2021. URL https://doi.org/10.25560/92202

    2021 doi

  19. [27]

    Fast-reversion limit of the H eston model

    Serguei Mechkov. Fast-reversion limit of the H eston model. Available at SSRN 2418631, 2015

    2015

  20. [28]

    Generating random variates using transformations with multiple roots

    John R Michael, William R Schucany, and Roy W Haas. Generating random variates using transformations with multiple roots. The American Statistician, 30 0 (2): 0 88--90, 1976

    1976

  21. [29]

    Salisbury

    Leonid Mytnik and Thomas S. Salisbury. Uniqueness for V olterra-type stochastic integral equations. arXiv preprint arXiv:1502.05513, 2015

    2015 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Stochastic Integration and Differential Equations

    Philip Protter. Stochastic Integration and Differential Equations. Number 21 in Applications of Mathematics. Springer, 1990

    1990

  23. [31]

    Continuous martingales and B rownian motion , volume 293

    Daniel Revuz and Marc Yor. Continuous martingales and B rownian motion , volume 293. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

    2013

  24. [32]

    On the discrete-time simulation of the rough H eston model

    Alexandre Richard, Xiaolu Tan, and Fan Yang. On the discrete-time simulation of the rough H eston model. SIAM Journal on Financial Mathematics, 14 0 (1): 0 223--249, 2023

    2023

  25. [33]

    Stochastic-process limits: an introduction to stochastic-process limits and their application to queues

    Ward Whitt. Stochastic-process limits: an introduction to stochastic-process limits and their application to queues. Springer Series in Operations Research. Springer, 2002

    2002

  26. [34]

    Proofs of the martingale FCLT

    Ward Whitt. Proofs of the martingale FCLT . Probability Surveys, 4: 0 268--302, 2007

    2007

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.