MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965850875 · doi:10.1002/asmb.492

A risk model driven by Lévy processes

2003· article· en· W1965850875 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersConcordia UniversitySociety of Actuaries
KeywordsAggregate (composite)EconometricsAsset (computer security)Mathematical economicsEconomicsLévy processRelevance (law)Risk modelFunction (biology)Risk premiumProcess (computing)Systematic riskComputer scienceMathematicsApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a general risk model where the aggregate claims, as well as the premium function, evolve by jumps. This is achieved by incorporating a Lévy process into the model. This seeks to account for the discrete nature of claims and asset prices. We give several explicit examples of Lévy processes that can be used to drive a risk model. This allows us to incorporate aggregate claims and premium fluctuations in the same process. We discuss important features of such processes and their relevance to risk modeling. We also extend classical results on ruin probabilities to this model. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.233 · 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