MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587904010 · doi:10.1002/asmb.2233

Application of the phase‐type mortality law to life contingencies and risk management

2017· article· en· W2587904010 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph H.T. Kim, Taehan Bae, Soyeun Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversification (marketing strategy)Life insuranceInterest rateActuarial scienceEconometricsIndex (typography)PopularityInterest rate riskComputer scienceEconomicsBusinessFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The class of phase‐type distributions has recently gained much popularity in insurance applications due to its mathematical tractability and denseness in the class of distributions defined on positive real line. In this paper, we show how to use the phase‐type mortality law as an efficient risk management tool for various life insurance applications. In particular, pure premiums, benefit reserves, and risk‐loaded premiums using CTE for standard life insurance products are shown to be available in analytic forms, leading to efficient computation and straightforward implementation. A way to explicitly determine provisions for adverse deviation for interest rate and mortality is also proposed. Furthermore, we show how the interest rate risk embedded in life insurance portfolios can be analyzed via interest rate sensitivity index and diversification index which are constructed based on the decomposition of portfolio variance. We also consider the applicability of phase‐type mortality law under a few non‐flat term structures of interest rate. Lastly, we explore how other properties of phase‐type distributions may be applied to joint‐life products as well as subgroup risk ordering and pricing within a given pool of insureds. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.864
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Stochastic Models in Business and IndustrySame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207