MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965418053 · doi:10.1108/15265940710732350

On the surplus prior to ruin in the perturbed classical risk process

2007· article· en· W1965418053 on OpenAlexaff
Jiandong Ren

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Risk Finance · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRuin theoryMathematicsBrownian motionFirst-hitting-time modelJoint probability distributionMathematical economicsType (biology)Risk modelApplied mathematicsRandom variableArgument (complex analysis)Marginal distributionEconometricsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this article is to consider the classical risk model that is perturbed by a Brownian motion process. The article derives explicit formulas for the joint and marginal probability density functions of the surplus prior to ruin and the deficit at ruin. Design/methodology/approach This article first extends the dual argument to probabilistically explain the symmetry between the two random variables related to the so‐called modified ladder height. Then the paper uses renewal arguments to derive the joint distribution of the surplus prior to ruin and the deficit at ruin. Findings The study derived an explicit formula for the undiscounted joint density in the perturbed risk model that is directly parallel to formula (3.2) for the classical risk model. The formula clearly shows that in a perturbed risk process, when ruin is caused by a claim, the p.d.f. of the surplus prior to ruin is continuous. In addition, shows that when the claim sizes follow a phase‐type distribution, all the relevant quantities can be conveniently computed. Originality/value The dual argument used in this article is novel. The formula first clearly shows that in the perturbed risk model, the p.d.f. of the surplus prior to ruin is continuous. When claim sizes are phase‐type, the formulas can be conveniently computed.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Risk FinanceSame topicProbability and Risk ModelsFrench-language works237,207