Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2001 iii Paper 23 4 c Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
Let have finite variance and mean . An independent-sample Monte Carlo estimator has variance , so its root-mean-square random error is . Three techniques reduce the variance coefficient rather than changing this ordinary rate.
For antithetic variates, couple with and average the pair. With independent pairs, the variance is , compared with for independent function evaluations. If is monotone in a scalar uniform, the covariance is nonpositive: for independent uniforms ,Opposite fluctuations therefore cancel. The reduction factor at equal evaluation count is , where is the paired correlation coefficient; it can approach zero, but positive covariance would make the method worse. This is appropriate for monotone or otherwise negatively coupled payoffs, with cheap complementary paths.
For control variates, use a jointly simulated with known mean and average . It remains an unbiased estimator for fixed , andCompleting the square gives and minimal variance . For contingent claim simulation, an analytically priced related financial payoff, such as a simpler option or discounted terminal stock, can be a useful control. It works best when correlation has large absolute value and simulation of the control adds little cost. A coefficient fixed from an independent pilot keeps the elementary unbiasedness argument valid; estimating it from the same sample can introduce finite-sample bias.
For stratified sampling, partition the sampling space into strata of probabilities , and independently simulate samples conditional on each stratum. The estimator is unbiased and has varianceWith proportional allocation , ignoring integer rounding, this equals . The law of total variance shows the reduction from ordinary sampling is : fixed representation removes randomness in the stratum counts. At equal per-draw cost, minimizing the displayed variance gives and minimum for positive within-stratum variances. This follows by Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and is useful when a low-dimensional coordinate strongly predicts the financial payoff and conditional simulation is easy.
There is no universal ranking. At comparable cost the variance factors depend respectively on paired covariance, squared control correlation, and within-stratum variation. A nearly perfect control can outperform a weak antithetic pair; an appropriate stratification can be almost exact for a nearly stratum-constant financial payoff. Extra construction and sampling costs must be included in a fair accuracy comparison, and the methods can be combined.