MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115041626 · doi:10.2143/ast.39.1.2038060

Uncertainty in Mortality Forecasting: An Extension to the Classical Lee-Carter Approach

2009· article· en· W2115041626 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAstin Bulletin · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsActuaUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsExtension (predicate logic)EconometricsProbabilistic logicConfidence intervalGoodness of fitProbabilistic forecastingInterval (graph theory)Model selectionMeasure (data warehouse)StatisticsMathematicsActuarial scienceEconomicsComputer scienceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Traditionally, actuaries have modeled mortality improvement using deterministic reduction factors, with little consideration of the associated uncertainty. As mortality improvement has become an increasingly significant source of financial risk, it has become important to measure the uncertainty in the forecasts. Probabilistic confidence intervals provided by the widely accepted Lee-Carter model are known to be excessively narrow, due primarily to the rigid structure of the model. In this paper, we relax the model structure by considering individual differences (heterogeneity) in each age-period cell. The proposed extension not only provides a better goodness-of-fit based on standard model selection criteria, but also ensures more conservative interval forecasts of central death rates and hence can better reflect the uncertainty entailed. We illustrate the results using US and Canadian mortality data.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score0.739

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.254 · 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