MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772626097 · doi:10.1017/jpr.2017.59

On the Parisian ruin of the dual Lévy risk model

2017· article· en· W2772626097 on OpenAlexafffund
Chen Yang, Kristina P. Sendova, Zhong Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Probability · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsRuin theoryMathematicsRisk modelFirst-hitting-time modelDual (grammatical number)Penalty methodPoisson distributionApplied mathematicsMathematical economicsStatisticsMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper we investigate the Parisian ruin problem of the general dual Lévy risk model. Unlike the usual concept of ultimate ruin, allowing the surplus level to be negative within a prespecified period indicates that the deficit at Parisian ruin is not necessarily equal to zero. Hence, we consider a Gerber–Shiu type expected discounted penalty function at the Parisian ruin and obtain an explicit expression for this function under the dual Lévy risk model. As particular cases, we calculate the Parisian ruin probability and the expected discountedkth moments of the deficit at the Parisian ruin for the compound Poisson dual risk model and a drift-diffusion model. Numerical examples are given to illustrate the behavior of Parisian ruin and the expected discounted deficit at Parisian ruin.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied ProbabilitySame topicProbability and Risk ModelsFrench-language works237,207