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 OpenAlexaff
Abel Cadenillas, Tahir Choulli, Michael Taksar, Lei Zhang

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.

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)0.002
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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

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

Citations145
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical FinanceSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207