MODELING THE NUMBER OF INSURED HOUSEHOLDS IN AN INSURANCE PORTFOLIO USING QUEUING THEORY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, we use queuing theory to model the number of insured households in an insurance portfolio. The model is based on an idea from Boucher and Couture-Piché (2015), who use a queuing theory model to estimate the number of insured cars on an insurance contract. Similarly, the proposed model includes households already insured, but the modeling approach is modified to include new households that could be added to the portfolio. For each household, we also use the queuing theory model to estimate the number of insured cars. We analyze an insurance portfolio from a Canadian insurance company to support this discussion. Statistical inference techniques serve to estimate each parameter of the model, even in cases where some explanatory variables are included in each of these parameters. We show that the proposed model offers a reasonable approximation of what is observed, but we also highlight the situations where the model should be improved. By assuming that the insurance company makes a $1 profit for each one-year car exposure, the proposed approach allows us to determine a global value of the insurance portfolio of an insurer based on the customer equity concept.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".