Parallel Simulations for Analysing Portfolios of Catastrophic Event Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the heart of the analytical pipeline of a modern quantitative insurance/reinsurance company is a stochastic simulation technique for portfolio risk analysis and pricing process referred to as Aggregate Analysis. Support for the computation of risk measures including Probable Maximum Loss (PML) and the Tail Value at Risk (TVAR) for a variety of types of complex property catastrophe insurance contracts including Cat eXcess of Loss (XL), or Per-Occurrence XL, and Aggregate XL, and contracts that combine these measures is obtained in Aggregate Analysis. In this paper, we explore parallel methods for aggregate risk analysis. A parallel aggregate risk analysis algorithm and an engine based on the algorithm is proposed. This engine is implemented in C and OpenMP for multi-core CPUs and in C and CUDA for many-core GPUs. Performance analysis of the algorithm indicates that GPUs offer an alternative HPC solution for aggregate risk analysis that is cost effective. The optimised algorithm on the GPU performs a 1 million trial aggregate simulation with 1000 catastrophic events per trial on a typical exposure set and contract structure in just over 20 seconds which is approximately 15x times faster than the sequential counterpart. This can sufficiently support the real-time pricing scenario in which an underwriter analyses different contractual terms and pricing while discussing a deal with a client over the phone.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".