𝔖 Bobbio Scriptorium
✦   LIBER   ✦

What is the Real Story for Interest Rate Volatility?

✍ Scribed by Andreas Hornstein; Harald Uhlig

Book ID
108560991
Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
2000
Tongue
English
Weight
148 KB
Volume
1
Category
Article
ISSN
1465-6485

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

πŸ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES

The real exchange rate–real interest rat
The real exchange rate–real interest rate relation: evidence from tests for symmetric and asymmetric threshold cointegration
✍ Robert Sollis; Mark E. Wohar πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 2006 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 212 KB πŸ‘ 1 views

## Abstract This paper investigates the existence of threshold cointegration between real exchange rates and real interest rate differentials. Unlike previous work, which generally fails to find evidence of a long‐run relationship employing linear models, we employ tests of the null hypothesis of n

Accounting for stochastic interest rates
Accounting for stochastic interest rates, stochastic volatility and a general correlation structure in the valuation of forward starting options
✍ Alexander Van Haastrecht; Antoon Pelsser πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 2010 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 366 KB πŸ‘ 1 views

factors explicitly into account for a proper valuation and risk management of these securities. The performed analysis is facilitated by deriving closed-form formulas for the valuation of forward starting options, hereby taking the stochastic volatility, stochastic interest rates as well the depende

The never-ending controversies of screen
The never-ending controversies of screening mammography : What is the appropriate callback rate for women undergoing screening mammographic examination?
✍ Rachel F. Brem πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 2004 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 54 KB πŸ‘ 1 views

Controversies regarding the recommendations for screening mammography seen to be never ending. In this issue of __Cancer__, Gur et al. report their findings that breast cancer diagnosis improves with increasing recall rate above 10% in a study of experienced, high‐volume radiologists. This editorial