MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2494023562 · doi:10.1002/9781119245445.ch18

Commercial and <scp>D</scp> &amp; <scp>O</scp> Insurance for Large Corporations : Best Practices in Protecting the Assets and Liabilities of Directors and Officers and Their Organizations

2016· other· en· W2494023562 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen J. Mallory

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInsurance and Financial Risk Management
Canadian institutionsCanadian Standards AssociationCrown Investments Corporation (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessRisk managementFinanceActuarial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter addresses the process of overseeing adequate insurance protection for a large organization and for its directors and officers. It is written primarily for directors and executives of sizeable organizations who spend in the hundreds of thousands and/or millions annually on insurance. Management can use this chapter to ensure that proper processes are in place to protect the organization with adequate insurance. The key organizational (insurable and noninsurable) risks are: growth risks, strategic risks, infrastructure risks, human risks, and financial risks. The chapter focuses on the general considerations that need to be reviewed in protecting directors and officers (D&O), and the D&O policy terms and conditions. A good overview can be provided by management via a summary of insurance document that lists the insurance coverages carried. The objective of the marketing process is to recalibrate coverages so as to ensure that the right protection has been placed with the right insurer(s).

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1500.046

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInsurance and Financial Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207