Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The risk of a global avian flu or influenza A (H1 N1) pandemic and the emergence of the worldwide SARS epidemic in 2002–2003 have led to a revived interest in the study of infectious diseases. Mathematical models have become important tools in analyzing the transmission dynamics and in measuring the effectiveness of controlling strategies. Research on infectious diseases in the actuarial literature goes only so far in setting up epidemiological models that better reflect the transmission dynamics. This paper attempts to build a bridge between epidemiological and actuarial modeling and set up an actuarial model that provides financial arrangements to cover the expenses resulting from the medical treatments of infectious diseases. Based on classical epidemiological compartment models, the first part of this paper proposes insurance policies and models to quantify the risk of infection and formulates financial arrangements, between an insurer and insureds, using actuarial methodology. For practical purposes, the second part employs a variety of numerical methods to calculate premiums and reserves. The last part illustrates the methods by designing insurance products for two well-known epidemics: the Great Plague in England and the SARS epidemic in Hong Kong.
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 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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".