MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111949477 · doi:10.1017/s1748499512000061

A Semi-Markov Multiple State Model for Reverse Mortgage Terminations

2012· article· en· W2111949477 on OpenAlexaff
Min Ji, Mary R. Hardy, Johnny Siu‐Hang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Actuarial Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsActuaUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrepayment of loanEquity (law)Home equityValuation (finance)Mortgage insuranceBusinessActuarial scienceShared appreciation mortgageEconomicsFinanceInsurance policyKey person insurance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Reverse mortgages provide a mechanism for seniors to release the equity that has been built up in their home. At termination, the mortgagors are usually guaranteed to owe no more than the value of their property. The value of the reverse mortgage guarantee is heavily dependent on the maturity or termination date, which is uncertain. In this paper, we model reverse mortgage terminations using a semi-Markov multiple state model which incorporates three different modes of exit: death, entrance into a long-term care facility, and voluntary prepayment. We apply the proposed model specifically to develop the valuation formulas for roll-up mortgages in the UK and Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECMs) in the USA. We examine the significance of each mode of termination by valuing the contracts allowing progressively for each mode. On the basis of our model and assumptions, we find that both health related terminations and voluntary (non-health related) terminations significantly impact the contract value. In addition we analyze the premium structure for US reverse mortgage insurance, and demonstrate that premiums appear to be too high for some borrowers, and substantial cross-subsidies may result.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations74
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Actuarial ScienceSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207