Use for the numerical-experiments part of a Mathematical Finance (Wiley) manuscript — adapted for a theory journal, this means illustrative computation that SUPPORTS a proof (convergence, error bounds, qualitative behavior), not empirical data analysis. Keeps numerics rigorous and subordinate to the theory.
Scanned 6/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill mathfin-data-analysis --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Mathfin Data Analysis?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-mathfin-data-analysis)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: mathfin-data-analysis
description: Use for the numerical-experiments part of a Mathematical Finance (Wiley) manuscript — adapted for a theory journal, this means illustrative computation that SUPPORTS a proof (convergence, error bounds, qualitative behavior), not empirical data analysis. Keeps numerics rigorous and subordinate to the theory.
---
# Numerical Experiments (mathfin-data-analysis)
## Note on framing
This is a **theory-first** journal. *Mathematical Finance* explicitly states that **numerical
experiments are welcome only when accompanied by a rigorous analysis** supporting the
theoretical developments, and that **routine application of computational methods to financial
data will not be considered**. So "data analysis" here is *not* empirical estimation — it is
numerical work that illustrates or stress-tests a theorem. This skill is deliberately lighter
than its empirical-journal counterpart.
## When to trigger
- You want to add simulations or a numerical scheme to a proof-based paper
- A referee may ask whether your theorem "does anything" beyond existence
- You need to show convergence, accuracy, or qualitative behavior predicted by the theory
## How to keep numerics journal-appropriate
1. **Tie every experiment to a result.** Each figure/table should illustrate a specific
theorem, proposition, or rate (e.g., "Monte Carlo error decays at the proven $O(n^{-1/2})$
rate", "the free boundary matches the smooth-fit characterization").
2. **State the method precisely.** Discretization scheme (Euler–Maruyama, Milstein, PDE
finite-difference/finite-element), step sizes, number of paths, variance reduction,
truncation of the domain — enough that the experiment is reproducible.
3. **Report error, not just output.** Where the theory gives a rate or bound, show the
empirical rate against it; show convergence as the grid refines.
4. **Choose parameters with financial meaning** (volatilities, maturities, strikes) so the
illustration speaks to the modelling problem.
5. **Keep numerics subordinate.** They support the theory; they are never the contribution.
Do not let a numerical section grow into a stand-alone empirical study.
## Reproducibility (light but real)
- Pin software/library versions; set and **report random seeds** for any Monte Carlo.
- Make illustrative code reproducible; consider archiving it (Zenodo/GitHub) and citing it.
- Include a **Data Availability Statement** even if no external data are used (see
mathfin-replication-and-data-policy).
## Anti-patterns
- A numerical study with no theorem behind it (out of scope for this journal).
- Plots with no error/convergence analysis where the theory promises a rate.
- Unstated scheme, step size, or path count — irreproducible.
- Calibrating to real market data and presenting it as the paper's result.
## Output format
```
【Experiment】what it illustrates (which theorem/rate)
【Method】scheme + step/paths + variance reduction
【Error reported】empirical vs. theoretical rate/bound
【Parameters】financial values used
【Reproducibility】seeds + versions + code location
【Next step】mathfin-tables-figures
```
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!