6 Track Declaration
This course is offered in two tracks. All students attend the same 24 common-core sessions (Sessions 1–24). From Session 25 onward, students separate into Track 1 (Practitioner) or Track 2 (Researcher). Both tracks reunite at Session 32 for project presentations.
6.1 Track at a Glance
| Track 1: Practitioner | Track 2: Researcher | |
|---|---|---|
| Best fit for | MBA, MSF (applied), MS Finance, professionals returning to school | MFE, MS Quantitative Finance, MS Financial Mathematics, PhD-track |
| Math prerequisite | Asset pricing + basic calculus | Stochastic calculus + measure-theoretic probability |
| Sessions 25–31 | Applied case workshops with real data | Full mathematical derivations and proofs |
| Problem sets | Empirical, platform-based (real fund data) | Mathematical (proofs + numerical implementation) |
| Project orientation | Apply GE-LAV to a real asset, present to a hypothetical IC | Extend the theory, novel calibration, or mathematical critique |
| Career trajectory | LP allocator, GP investment professional, fund consultant, regulator | Quant researcher, academic, PhD applicant, model validation, central bank research |
6.2 Why Two Tracks?
This course covers material at two very different levels of mathematical sophistication. The book itself is structured for two audiences: Part 1 (Chapters 1–9) is the Practitioner’s Guide, requiring no advanced math. Part 2 (Chapters 10–20) is the Researcher’s Framework, requiring stochastic calculus and measure theory.
Forcing all students into one track has two failure modes:
- Lowest-common-denominator track: Teaches only Part 1. MFE/PhD students are bored and don’t get the math they need. The course feels too easy for them.
- Highest-common-denominator track: Teaches both parts at full rigor. MBA/MSF students cannot follow the math and either drop the course or memorize without understanding.
The two-track design solves this by sharing a common 24-session core (which covers Part 1 plus the intuition of Part 2 results) and then diverging for 7 sessions during which Track 1 students do applied workshops and Track 2 students do the math.
6.3 How to Decide
6.3.1 Choose Track 1 (Practitioner) if you:
- Plan a career as an LP allocator, GP investment professional, fund consultant, advisor, or regulator
- Want to use GE-LAV in real investment work, not extend the theory
- Have strong asset pricing and applied finance background, but limited or no stochastic calculus
- Are more excited by “how do I apply this to a real fund?” than “how do I prove this theorem?”
- Want to spend more time on PE, VC, infrastructure, and private credit case work
6.3.2 Choose Track 2 (Researcher) if you:
- Plan a career as a quant researcher, academic, PhD candidate, or model validator
- Have completed (or are currently taking) graduate-level stochastic processes / stochastic calculus
- Are comfortable with measure-theoretic probability (σ-algebras, filtrations, Radon-Nikodym derivatives)
- Want to engage with the full math of GE-LAV — HJB equations, McKean-Vlasov SDEs, mean-field games
- May want to extend or critique the GE-LAV framework for a thesis, dissertation, or research paper
6.3.3 Still unsure?
The first 4 sessions are designed to help you decide. Session 4 (OU Process Intuition) is a deliberate diagnostic — if the OU process feels challenging at the intuition level, you should probably take Track 1. If you find yourself wanting more math depth than Session 4 provides, Track 2 is for you.
You may also schedule a 15-minute meeting with the instructor between Session 2 and Session 5 to discuss your background and goals.
6.4 Declaration Policy
Declaration deadline: end of Session 5.
Track choice is made via the course site form. After the deadline, track changes require instructor approval and are granted only in exceptional cases (e.g., the student took a stochastic processes course in parallel that wasn’t on their transcript when they enrolled).
Default track: If you do not declare by the deadline, you are assigned to Track 1 (Practitioner). This protects students who underestimate the math requirement.
6.5 What Stays the Same Across Tracks
- All 24 common-core sessions (Sessions 1–24)
- The midterm exam (Session 10) — identical for both tracks
- The book reading schedule for Part 1 (Ch 1–9)
- The lecture recordings — both tracks can watch each other’s sessions afterward
- The term project structure — both tracks complete the same 3 milestones (proposal, draft, presentation)
- Office hours and TA support
- Class participation expectations
6.6 What Differs Across Tracks
- Sessions 25–31: Different content in parallel (Track 1 in one room, Track 2 in another)
- Problem sets: Same drop dates, different question content
- Book reading: Part 2 (Ch 10–20) is required for Track 2 and recommended-optional for Track 1
- Project rubric weighting: Slightly different emphasis (applied implementation vs. theoretical depth) — see project specification
6.7 Cross-Track Audit Policy
Students enrolled in one track may audit sessions from the other track for free (synchronously online or asynchronously via recordings). Some Track 1 students will want to watch the Session 25 HJB derivation lecture even if they’re not assessed on it; some Track 2 students will benefit from watching the Session 25 PE buyout case workshop. This is encouraged.
You may also choose to do the other track’s problem sets for your own learning (not for credit). The instructor will provide solutions to both PSet streams.
6.8 Two-Track Honor System
The course depends on students self-selecting honestly. Choosing Track 1 when your background can handle Track 2 means you’ll get an easier course (and a likely higher grade), but you’ll miss the math that makes GE-LAV intellectually distinctive. Choosing Track 2 when you don’t have the math prep means you’ll struggle through proofs without genuine understanding, and your project quality will suffer. Choose honestly.