MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105980583 · doi:10.1080/03461230701396474

Analysis of a threshold dividend strategy for a MAP risk model

2007· article· en· W2105980583 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Actuarial Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRuin theoryDividendMathematicsRisk modelLaplace transformFirst-hitting-time modelEconometricsExponential distributionExponential functionJoint probability distributionRisk processPresent valueMathematical economicsEconomicsDistribution (mathematics)Markov processApplied mathematicsStatisticsMathematical analysisFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a class of Markovian risk models in which the insurer collects premiums at rate c1(c2) whenever the surplus level is below (above) a constant threshold level b. We derive the Laplace-Stieltjes transform (LST) of the distribution of the time to ruin as well as the LST (with respect to time) of the joint distribution of the time to ruin, the surplus prior to ruin, and the deficit at ruin. By interpreting that the insurer pays dividends continuously at rate c1−c2 whenever the surplus level is above b, we also derive the expected discounted value of total dividend payments made prior to ruin. Our results are obtained by making use of an existing connection which links an insurer's surplus process to an embedded fluid flow process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.160
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.259 · 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