MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142274344 · doi:10.1239/jap/1127322015

The finite-time ruin probability of the compound Poisson model with constant interest force

2005· article· en· W2142274344 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Probability · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Science and Technology of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMathematicsRuin theoryPoisson distributionConstant (computer programming)Simple (philosophy)Zero-inflated modelFirst-hitting-time modelCompound Poisson processProbability theoryProbability distributionAsymptotic formulaDistribution (mathematics)Applied mathematicsMathematical analysisRisk modelStatisticsPoisson processPoisson regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we establish a simple asymptotic formula for the finite-time ruin probability of the compound Poisson model with constant interest force and subexponential claims in the case that the initial surplus is large. The formula is consistent with known results for the ultimate ruin probability and, in particular, is uniform for all time horizons when the claim size distribution is regularly varying tailed.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.736
Threshold uncertainty score0.816

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.219 · 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