Early Detection of High-Risk Claims at the Workers' Compensation Board of British Columbia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We developed a combined decision-analysis and logistic-regression approach for identifying high-risk claims at the Workers' Compensation Board of British Columbia (WCB). The early detection of such claims and subsequent intervention is likely to reduce their eventual cost and to speed up worker rehabilitation. High-risk claims are extremely costly to the WCB; for the approximately 321,000 short-term disability claims with injury dates between 1989 and 1992, high-risk claims accounted for $1.2 billion (64 percent) of the total payment of $1.8 billion, even though they constituted only 4.2 percent of the claims. We developed separate logistic regression models for each injury type. We found that the age of worker and number of workdays lost were predictive of high-risk status. We used decision analysis to develop a classification rule that has high out-of-sample predictive power. The WCB has incorporated these results in a claims-profiling scorecard, which identifies claims needing early intervention. We estimate that our method saves the WCB $4.7 million annually.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it