MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997389624 · doi:10.1017/s1357321700004682

The Importance of Year of Birth in Two-Dimensional Mortality Data

2006· article· en· W1997389624 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen J. Richards, J. G. Kirkby, I. D. Currie

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Actuarial Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsTellabs (Canada)
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsLongevityDemographyLongevity riskCohortCohort effectLife tablePopulationPensionActuarial scienceEconomicsMedicineGerontologyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Late-life mortality patterns are of crucial interest to actuaries assessing longevity risk. One important explanatory variable is year of birth. We present the results of various analyses demonstrating this, including a statistical model which lends weight to the importance of year-of-birth effects in both population and insured data. We further find that a model based on age and year of birth fits United Kingdom mortality data better than a model based on age and period, suggesting that cohort effects are more significant than period effects. The financial implications of these cohort effects are considerable for portfolios with long-term longevity exposure, such as annuities written by insurance companies and defined benefit pension schemes.

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.112
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.112
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations78
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Actuarial JournalSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207