Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This research investigates whether machine learning can identify systematic deviations from the Black-Scholes model in options pricing using 2.6 million real contracts. The study finds that tree-based methods preserving domain structure significantly outperform abstract embeddings, while neural networks and standard models agree nearly perfectly on deviation labels, indicating these patterns reflect market mechanics rather than artifacts. Ultimately, the work suggests that in finance, maintaining explicit symbolic features is superior to learning high-level abstractions for detecting model limitations.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Learning to Detect Symbolic Failure: Machine Learning and the Limits of Black-Scholes

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2609.27764v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We treat options pricing as a representation problem: can machine learning detect systematic deviations from Black-Scholes using 2.6M real option contracts? We compare three regimes: learned abstract embeddings (Kernel PCA), preserved domain structure (tree-based ensembles), and neural network validation. Tree-based methods outperform kernel dimensionality reduction by 21.5 percentage points (93.8% vs 72.3%), and domain-expert features (Greeks, moneyness) outperform engineered features. NN-based and BS-based deviation labels agree 99.9974% of the time, suggesting deviations reflect market structure rather than model artifact. We conclude that in domains with expert-designed symbolic features, preserving structure beats learning abstractions. We make no claim of exploitable mispricings.

Abstract:We treat options pricing as a representation problem: can machine learning detect systematic deviations from Black-Scholes using 2.6M real option contracts? We compare three regimes: learned abstract embeddings (Kernel PCA), preserved domain structure (tree-based ensembles), and neural network validation. Tree-based methods outperform kernel dimensionality reduction by 21.5 percentage points (93.8% vs 72.3%), and domain-expert features (Greeks, moneyness) outperform engineered features. NN-based and BS-based deviation labels agree 99.9974% of the time, suggesting deviations reflect market structure rather than model artifact. We conclude that in domains with expert-designed symbolic features, preserving structure beats learning abstractions. We make no claim of exploitable mispricings.

Machine Learning (cs.LG); Computational Engineering, Finance, and Science (cs.CE)

arXiv:2609.27764 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2609.27764v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.27764 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 200 words

Related coverage