Yes We Can (Price Derivatives on Survivor Indices)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We propose a simulation approach to value derivatives when the underlying dynamics are estimated using the survivor indices directly. Our results show that survivor forward and swap premiums increase with maturity and with the market price of risk. Our results also confirm that taking the optionality into consideration is important from a pricing perspective, for both U.S. women and men. We compare our results to what is obtained using an alternative modeling approach in which a Lee–Carter model is used to indirectly model the survivor index. Compared to this method, our estimated premiums and prices are higher for all longevity products. Moreover, comparing American‐style with European‐style options we find that, although the early exercise option has value when using survivor indices directly, the relative value of the early exercise option is significantly less than when the Lee–Carter model is used to indirectly model the survivor index. It follows that the assumed mortality dynamics have important implications for the term structure of forward and swap premiums and for the effect that changes in the market price of risk has on them.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it