MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2231834299 · doi:10.1080/03461238.2015.1090476

Ordering properties of the smallest and largest claim amounts in a general scale model

2015· article· en· W2231834299 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

VenueScandinavian Actuarial Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMajorizationMathematicsWeibull distributionStochastic orderingBernoulli's principleScale (ratio)Random variableExponential functionApplied mathematicsMatrix (chemical analysis)CombinatoricsStatisticsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Suppose is a set of non-negative random variables with having the distribution function , for and are independent Bernoulli random variables, independent of the ’s, with , . Let , for . It is of interest to note that in actuarial science, corresponds to the claim amount in a portfolio of risks. In this paper, under certain conditions, by using the concept of vector majorization and related orders, we discuss stochastic comparison between the smallest claim amount in the sense of the usual stochastic and hazard rate orders. We also obtain the usual stochastic order between the largest claim amounts when the matrix of parameters changes to another matrix in a mathematical sense. We then apply the results for three special cases of the scale model: generalized gamma, Marshall–Olkin extended exponential and exponentiated Weibull distributions with possibly different scale parameters to illustrate the established results.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.268
Threshold uncertainty score0.232

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.201 · 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