Let the unknown parameter of interest be μ {\displaystyle \mu } , and assume we have a statistic m {\displaystyle m} such that the expected value of m is μ: E [ m ] = μ {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} \left[m\right]=\mu } , i.e. m is an unbiased estimator for μ. Suppose we calculate another statistic t {\displaystyle t} such that E [ t ] = τ {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} \left[t\right]=\tau } is a known value. Then
is also an unbiased estimator for μ {\displaystyle \mu } for any choice of the coefficient c {\displaystyle c} . The variance of the resulting estimator m ⋆ {\displaystyle m^{\star }} is
By differentiating the above expression with respect to c {\displaystyle c} , it can be shown that choosing the optimal coefficient
minimizes the variance of m ⋆ {\displaystyle m^{\star }} . (Note that this coefficient is the same as the coefficient obtained from a linear regression.) With this choice,
where
is the correlation coefficient of m {\displaystyle m} and t {\displaystyle t} . The greater the value of | ρ m , t | {\displaystyle \vert \rho _{m,t}\vert } , the greater the variance reduction achieved.
In the case that Cov ( m , t ) {\displaystyle {\textrm {Cov}}\left(m,t\right)} , Var ( t ) {\displaystyle {\textrm {Var}}\left(t\right)} , and/or ρ m , t {\displaystyle \rho _{m,t}\;} are unknown, they can be estimated across the Monte Carlo replicates. This is equivalent to solving a certain least squares system; therefore this technique is also known as regression sampling.
When the expectation of the control variable, E [ t ] = τ {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} \left[t\right]=\tau } , is not known analytically, it is still possible to increase the precision in estimating μ {\displaystyle \mu } (for a given fixed simulation budget), provided that the two conditions are met: 1) evaluating t {\displaystyle t} is significantly cheaper than computing m {\displaystyle m} ; 2) the magnitude of the correlation coefficient | ρ m , t | {\displaystyle |\rho _{m,t}|} is close to unity. 4
We would like to estimate
using Monte Carlo integration. This integral is the expected value of f ( U ) {\displaystyle f(U)} , where
and U follows a uniform distribution [0, 1]. Using a sample of size n denote the points in the sample as u 1 , ⋯ , u n {\displaystyle u_{1},\cdots ,u_{n}} . Then the estimate is given by
Now we introduce g ( U ) = 1 + U {\displaystyle g(U)=1+U} as a control variate with a known expected value E [ g ( U ) ] = ∫ 0 1 ( 1 + x ) d x = 3 2 {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} \left[g\left(U\right)\right]=\int _{0}^{1}(1+x)\,\mathrm {d} x={\tfrac {3}{2}}} and combine the two into a new estimate
Using n = 1500 {\displaystyle n=1500} realizations and an estimated optimal coefficient c ⋆ ≈ 0.4773 {\displaystyle c^{\star }\approx 0.4773} we obtain the following results
The variance was significantly reduced after using the control variates technique. (The exact result is I = ln 2 ≈ 0.69314718 {\displaystyle I=\ln 2\approx 0.69314718} .)
Lemieux, C. (2017). "Control Variates". Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online: 1–8. doi:10.1002/9781118445112.stat07947. ISBN 9781118445112. 9781118445112 ↩
Glasserman, P. (2004). Monte Carlo Methods in Financial Engineering. New York: Springer. ISBN 0-387-00451-3 (p. 185) /wiki/ISBN_(identifier) ↩
Botev, Z.; Ridder, A. (2017). "Variance Reduction". Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online: 1–6. doi:10.1002/9781118445112.stat07975. ISBN 9781118445112. 9781118445112 ↩