MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

CLASSICAL AND IMPULSE STOCHASTIC CONTROL FOR THE OPTIMIZATION OF THE DIVIDEND AND RISK POLICIES OF AN INSURANCE FIRM

2006· article· en· W2125854305 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Finance · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStochastic controlDividendBankruptcyImpulse controlDividend policyBellman equationOptimization problemEconomicsActuarial sciencePaymentMathematical optimizationTime horizonControl (management)Optimal controlMathematical economicsMathematicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper deals with the dividend optimization problem for a financial or an insurance entity which can control its business activities, simultaneously reducing the risk and potential profits. It also controls the timing and the amount of dividends paid out to the shareholders. The objective of the corporation is to maximize the expected total discounted dividends paid out until the time of bankruptcy. Due to the presence of a fixed transaction cost, the resulting mathematical problem becomes a mixed classical‐impulse stochastic control problem. The analytical part of the solution to this problem is reduced to quasivariational inequalities for a second‐order nonlinear differential equation. We solve this problem explicitly and construct the value function together with the optimal policy. We also compute the expected time between dividend payments under the optimal policy.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score0.424

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.255 · 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