<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Monte-Carlo on Inflection Quant</title><link>https://inflectionquant.com/tags/monte-carlo/</link><description>Recent content in Monte-Carlo on Inflection Quant</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://inflectionquant.com/tags/monte-carlo/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Monte Carlo Variance Reduction: What We Average, and How We Sample</title><link>https://inflectionquant.com/articles/mc_variance_reduction/</link><pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://inflectionquant.com/articles/mc_variance_reduction/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="why-this-matters"&gt;Why This Matters&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the article on the &lt;a href="../../articles/feynman_kac/"&gt;Feynman-Kac theorem&lt;/a&gt;, we saw that the price of a derivative can be expressed equivalently as the solution to a deterministic PDE or as the expectation of a discounted payoff under the risk-neutral measure. This gives us two complementary numerical approaches to pricing. For low-dimensional problems with smooth payoffs, finite difference methods on the PDE side are efficient and accurate. For high-dimensional problems, path-dependent payoffs, or models where the PDE is hard to derive, Monte Carlo (MC) on the expectation side becomes the natural choice.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>How Randomness Solves a Deterministic Equation: An Intuitive Look at the Feynman–Kac Theorem</title><link>https://inflectionquant.com/articles/feynman_kac/</link><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://inflectionquant.com/articles/feynman_kac/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="why-this-matters"&gt;Why This Matters&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The first time I encountered the Feynman-Kac theorem, I found it fascinating but
unintuitive. The theorem claims that a deterministic PDE and the expectation of
a stochastic process are two representations of the same object. A PDE is smooth and
deterministic. A stochastic expectation involves randomness, probability measures, and
averaging over infinitely many paths. How could these be the same thing? I understood the steps of the proof, but I still didn’t have a clear intuition for why this equivalence should exist.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>