MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003043371 · doi:10.1080/03461230601110447

On composite lognormal-Pareto models

2007· article· en· W2003043371 on OpenAlexafffund
David P. M. Scollnik

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Actuarial Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPareto principleLog-normal distributionMathematicsEconometricsComposite numberPareto distributionStatisticsApplied mathematicsComputer scienceMathematical optimizationMathematical economicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, Cooray & Ananda (2005) proposed a composite lognormal-Pareto model for use with loss payments data of the sort arising in the actuarial and insurance industries. Their model is based on a lognormal density up to an unknown threshold value and a two-parameter Pareto density thereafter. Here we identify and discuss limitations of this composite lognormal-Pareto model which are likely to severely curtail its potential for practical application to real world data sets. In addition, we present two different composite models based on lognormal and Pareto models in order to address these concerns. The performance of all three composite models is discussed and compared in the context of an example based upon a well-known fire insurance data set.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.250
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

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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations182
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScandinavian Actuarial JournalSame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207