Searches for Compositeness at the Tevatron

Quark-quark and quark-lepton searches for compositenss at the Fermilab Tevatron are summarized. These are of the contact-interaction variety where sqrt(s-hat) < the hypothesized mass scales, Lambda. Tevatron experiments limit a variety of compositeness phenomena in the range from 1.9 to 8.3 TeV. These limits result from measurements of: the Ht spectrum (D0), dijet mass (D0), dijet angular distribution (CDF, D0), drell-yan production (CDF, D0), and the Neutral Current to Charged Current ratio (CCFR/NuTeV).Comment: Presented at VIIIth RENCONTRES DE BLOIS, with recent updates added. 7 Figure

An Introduction to Gauge Gravity Duality and Its Application in Condensed Matter

The past few years have witnessed a remarkable crossover of string theoretical ideas from the abstract world of geometrical forms to the concrete experimental realm of condensed matter physics. The basis for this --- variously known as holography, the AdS/CFT correspondence or gauge-gravity duality --comes from notions right at the cutting edge of string theory. Nevertheless, the insights afforded can often be expressed in ways very familiar to condensed matter physicists, such as relationships between response functions and new sum rules. The aim of this short, introductory review is to survey the ideas underpinning this crossover, in a way that -- as far as possible -- strips them of sophisticated mathematical formalism, whilst at the same time retaining their fundamental essence. I will sketch the areas in which progress has been made to date and highlight where the challenges and open questions lie. Finally, I will attempt to give a perspective upon these ideas. What contribution can we realistically expect from this approach and how might it be accommodated into the canon of condensed matter theory? Inevitably, any attempt to do this in such a rapidly evolving field will be superseded by events. Nevertheless, I hope that this will provide a useful way to think about gauge-gravity duality and the uncharted directions in which it might take us.Comment: Unedited version of article published in Contemporary Physics. Intended for advanced final-year undergraduate

Regulatory-Optimal Funding

Funding is a cost to trading desks that they see as an input. Current FVA-related literature reflects this by also taking funding costs as an input, usually constant, and always risk-neutral. However, this funding curve is the output from a Treasury point of view. Treasury must consider Regulatory-required liquidity buffers, and both risk-neutral (Q) and physical measures (P). We describe the Treasury funding problem and optimize against both measures, using the Regulatory requirement as a constraint. We develop theoretically optimal strategies for Q and P, then demonstrate a combined approach in four markets (USD, JPY, EUR, GBP). Since we deal with physical measures we develop appropriate statistical tests, and demonstrate highly significant (p<0.00001), out-of-sample, improvements on hedged funding with a combined approach achieving 44% to 71% of a perfect information criterion. Thus regulatory liquidity requirements change both the funding problem and funding costs.Comment: 20 pages; 8 figures; 2 tables, Risk, April 201

CDS pricing under Basel III: capital relief and default protection

Basel III introduces new capital charges for CVA. These charges, and the Basel 2.5 default capital charge can be mitigated by CDS. Therefore, to price in the capital relief that CDS contracts provide, we introduce a CDS pricing model with three legs: premium; default protection; and capital relief. If markets are complete, with no CDS bond basis, then CDSs can be replicated by taking short positions in risky floating bonds issued by the reference entity and a riskless bank account. If these conditions do not hold, then it is theoretically possible that the capital relief that CDSs provide may be priced in. Thus our model provides bounds on the CDS-implied hazard rates when markets are incomplete. Under simple assumptions we show that 20% to over 50% of observed CDS spread could be due to priced in capital relief. Given that this is different for IMM and non-IMM banks will we see differential pricing?Comment: 16 pages, 10 figues, 3 table