MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2460748582 · doi:10.1007/s13385-016-0134-y

Rank-based methods for modeling dependence between loss triangles

2016· article· en· W2460748582 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Actuarial Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalMcGill University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaCanadian Statistical Sciences InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCopula (linguistics)EconometricsPortfolioInferenceMultivariate statisticsModel selectionComputer scienceMathematicsEconomicsStatisticsFinanceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to determine the risk capital for their aggregate portfolio, property and casualty insurance companies must fit a multivariate model to the loss triangle data relating to each of their lines of business. As an inadequate choice of dependence structure may have an undesirable effect on reserve estimation, a two-stage inference strategy is proposed in this paper to assist with model selection and validation. Generalized linear models are first fitted to the margins. Standardized residuals from these models are then linked through a copula selected and validated using rank-based methods. The approach is illustrated with data from six lines of business of a large Canadian insurance company for which two hierarchical dependence models are considered, i.e., a fully nested Archimedean copula structure and a copula-based risk aggregation model.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.316 · 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