Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-5wvtr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T03:07:58.796Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

R&D projects analyzed by semimartingale methods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2016

Knut K. Aase
Knut K. Aase*
Affiliation:
Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration
*
∗Postal address: Department of Insurance, Norwegian School of Economics and Business Adminstration, 5035 Sandviken, Norway.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article we examine R&D projects where the project status changes according to a general dynamic stochastic equation. This allows for both continuous and jump behavior of the project status. The time parameter is continuous. The decision variable includes a non-stationary resource expenditure strategy and a stopping policy which determines when the project should be terminated. Characterization of stationary policies becomes straightforward in the present setting. A non-linear equation is determined for the expected discounted return from the project. This equation, which is of a very general nature, has been considered in certain special cases, where it becomes manageable. The examples include situations where the project status changes according to a compound Poisson process, a geometric Brownian motion, and a Brownian motion with drift. In those cases we demonstrate how the exact solution can be obtained and the optimal policy found.

Keywords

STOCHASTIC DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONSOPTIMAL STOPPINGCONTROL OF A SEMIMARTINGALEITO–MEYER'S FORMULACOMPOUND POISSON PROCESSDIFFUSIONS
Type
Research Papers
Information
Journal of Applied Probability , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , June 1985 , pp. 288 - 299
Copyright
Copyright © Applied Probability Trust 1985 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Part of the research was carried out when the author was visiting the Department of Statistics, University of California, Berkeley.

References

Aalen, O. O. (1976) Statistical Inference for a Family of Counting Processes. Institute of Mathematical Statistics, University of Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Aase, K. K. (1984) Optimum portfolio diversification in a general continuous-time model. Stoch. Proc. Appl. 18, 81–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bremaud, P. (1981) Point Processes and Queues: Martingale Dynamics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brillinger, D. R. (1978) Comparative aspects of the study of ordinary time series and of point processes. In Developments in Statistics, Vol. 1, ed. Krishnaiah, P. R., Academic Press, New York, 34–134.Google Scholar
Deshmukh, S. D. and Chikte, S. D. (1977) Dynamic investment strategies for a risky R&D project. J. Appl. Prob. 14, 144–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckberg, A. E. (1983) Rouche's Theorem: A viable approach to the practical numerical solution of stochastic models. AT&T Bell Laboratories, NJ, USA.Google Scholar
Gihman, I. I. and Skorohod, A. V. (1979) Controlled Stochastic Processes. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipster, R. S. and Shiryayev, A. N. (1977) Statistics of Random Processes, Vol. I and II. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
Roberts, K. and Weitzman, M. L. (1981) Funding criteria for research, development, and exploration projects. Econometrica 49, 1261–1288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuckerman, D. (1980) A diffusion process model for the optimal investment strategies of an R&D project. J. Appl. Prob. 17, 646–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar