MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2527543320

소수연령 독립 가정에서 탈퇴율의 성질

2008· article· ko· W2527543320 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
이항석

Bibliographic record

Venue응용통계연구 = The Korean journal of applied statistics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsIndependence (probability theory)StatisticsQuarter (Canadian coin)Series (stratigraphy)GeneralizationDemographyEconometricsGeographyMathematical analysisGeologySociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

생명표(life table) 또는 다중탈퇴표(multiple decrement table)는 연령별로 1년 이내에 탈퇴가 발생할 확률을 나타내지만 보험의 탈퇴현상은 특정 연령에서 1년 이내 임의 시점에 탈퇴가 발생할 확률을 필요로 한다. 따라서 이러한 현상을 나타내는 소수연령(Fractional Age)에 대한 분포의 가정이 탈퇴율의 계산에 필수적인 요소이다. 실무에서는 UDD 가정을 이용하여 소수연령 분포에 대체하고 있다. 본 논문에서는 Lee (2008)의 다중탈퇴율과 절대탈퇴율의 전환 공식을 UDD 가정 대신에 보다 일반적인 가정인 소수연령 독립(FI: Fractional Age Independence) 가정하에서 연 기준의 절대탈퇴율을 월 기준의 다중탈퇴율로 전환하거나 연 기준의 다중탈퇴율을 월 기준의 절대탈퇴율로 전환하는 공식을 유도한다. 유도된 공식은 월 기준 대신에 일(day) 기준 또는 분기(quarter) 기준 또는 반기(semiannual) 기준 등으로도 전환 가능한 공식이다. 또한 월 기준의 절대탈퇴율에서 월 기준의 다중탈퇴율로 전환 가능한 공식도 제시한다. 추가적으로 다중탈퇴율이 FI 가정을 따를 때 절대탈퇴율에서 다중탈퇴 율로 전환하는 공식도 유도한다. 여러 가지 유도된 공식은 Bowers 등 (1997)와 Lee (2008)에 있는 전환 공식 일반적인 형태임을 확인할 수 있다. 또한 여러 가지 유도된 공식을 이용하여 수치 예를 통하여 절대탈퇴율과 다중탈퇴율의 전환과정을 각각 설명한다. 【This paper derives conversion formulas from yearly-based absolute rates of decrements to monthly-based rates of decrement due to cause j under FI (fractional age independence) assumption that is a generalization of UDD assumption. Next, it suggests conversion formulas from monthly-based absoluterates of decrements to monthly-based rates of decrement due to cause j under FI assumption. In addition, it calculates conversion formulas from yearly-based rates of decrement due to cause j to the corresponding monthly-based absolute rates of decrements under FI assumption. Some numerical examples are discussed.】

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0790.027

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue응용통계연구 = The Korean journal of applied statisticsSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207