Analysis of the Compound Poisson Surplus Model with Liquid Reserves, Interest and Dividends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The paper incorporates liquid reserves, interest and dividends in the compound Poisson surplus model. When an insurer's surplus is below a certain level, it is kept as liquid reserves. As the surplus attains the level, the excess of the surplus above the level will earn interest at a constant interest rate. If the surplus continues to surpass a higher level, the excess of the surplus above this higher level will be paid out as dividends to the insurer's shareholders at a constant dividend rate or by the threshold strategy. The lower and higher levels are called the liquid reserve level and the threshold level, respectively. This paper is to discuss the interactions of the liquid reserve level, the interest rate, the threshold level, and the dividend rate in the proposed risk model by studying the expected discounted penalty function and the expected present value of dividends paid up to the time of ruin. We derive expressions for the solutions to both quantities via the approach of integro-differential equation systems. We show that the dividend-penalty identity (Gerber et al. 2006, ASTIN Bulletin) still holds for the threshold strategy with liquid reserves and interest. We illustrate these results by deriving explicit solutions to the probability of ultimate ruin under the threshold strategy when claim sizes are exponentially distributed. In the end, we also discuss the impact of the liquid reserve level, the interest rate, the threshold level, and the dividend rate on the ruin probability by numerical examples.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".