MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pricing Standardized Mortality Securitizations: A Two‐Population Model With Transitory Jump Effects

2013· article· en· W1632830938 on OpenAlexaff
Rui Zhou, Johnny Siu‐Hang Li, Ken Seng Tan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Risk & Insurance · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJumpPopulationEconomicsEconometricsMortality ratePopulation modelActuarial scienceDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract Mortality dynamics are subject to jumps that are due to events such as wars and pandemics. Such jumps can have a significant impact on prices of securities that are designed for hedging catastrophic mortality risk, and therefore should be taken into account in modeling. Although several single‐population mortality models with jump effects have been developed, they are not adequate for modeling trades in which the hedger's population is different from the population associated with the security being traded. In this article, we first develop a two‐population mortality model with transitory jump effects, and then we use the proposed model and an economic‐pricing framework to examine how mortality jumps may affect the supply and demand of mortality‐linked securities.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations71
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Risk & InsuranceSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207