MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060743382 · doi:10.1080/0003684042000337433

Binary choice models for rare events data: a crop insurance fraud application

2005· article· en· W2060743382 on OpenAlexaff
Yufei Jin, Roderick M. Rejesus, Bertis B. Little

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Economics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsAgricultural Research Institute of Ontario
FundersTexas Tech University
KeywordsCrop insuranceActuarial scienceContext (archaeology)LogitProbitEconometricsInsurance policyEconomicsComputer scienceBusinessAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study implements a recently proposed score test that could help guide insurance fraud researchers in deciding whether to use a logit or a probit model in predicting insurance fraud probabilities, especially when the occurrence of ones in the dependent variable is much less than zeros. The test is easily implemented in a crop insurance fraud context and seems to be a promising method that could be applicable to analysing and detecting potentially fraudulent claims in various lines of insurance.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.107
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.107
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations43
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied EconomicsSame topicAgricultural risk and resilienceFrench-language works237,207