The stock exchanges provide the data of option prices using theoretical formulations such as Black-Scholes formula. The dataset necessary for training an artificial neural network (ANN) to address option pricing models, specifically the Black-Scholes model, has already been produced using the same formulas. However, the literature claims that ANNs can capture more realistic and broadly applicable market assumptions, including non-linearity and stochastic volatility.
I wonder how can we substantiate, through mathematical reasoning, the claim that ANNs are more effective than exact and numerical solutions? OR
On what basis should I justify ANNs can potentially capture and generalize complex relationships between the variables in a way that analytical or numerical methods may not?
In a paper entitled "A neural network model for estimating option prices", the author claims 'Approximately for half of the cases that they examined, mean squared error for the neural network is smaller than that of Black-Scholes, which implies the good performance of ANN relative to Black and Scholes'.
I know how to calculate the MSE error of ANN predictions from Black-Scholes formula. What does the phrase 'smaller than that of Black-Scholes mean'? How is the MSE error of the BS formula calculated? Relative to what it is calculating? From where that true data we get? How does that true data generate?
Can I say the error comes due to continuous evolution of the Black–Scholes models over time, such as regime switching, Jump diffusion, variable volatility, stochastic volatility, fractal dynamics, etc.?
Thanks for your valuable response in advance.