MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784063821 · doi:10.1515/demo-2017-0018

CMPH: a multivariate phase-type aggregate loss distribution

2017· article· en· W2784063821 on OpenAlexafffund
Jiandong Ren, Ričardas Zitikis

Bibliographic record

VenueDependence Modeling · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMultivariate statisticsJoint probability distributionMarkov chainMathematicsAggregate (composite)Moment-generating functionApplied mathematicsDistribution (mathematics)Binomial distributionMultivariate normal distributionEconometricsMoment (physics)Random variableMathematical optimizationStatisticsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We introduce a compound multivariate distribution designed for modeling insurance losses arising from different risk sources in insurance companies. The distribution is based on a discrete-time Markov Chain and generalizes the multivariate compound negative binomial distribution, which is widely used for modeling insurance losses.We derive fundamental properties of the distribution and discuss computational aspects facilitating calculations of risk measures of the aggregate loss, as well as allocations of the aggregate loss to individual types of risk sources. Explicit formulas for the joint moment generating function and the joint moments of different loss types are derived, and recursive formulas for calculating the joint distributions given. Several special cases of particular interest are analyzed. An illustrative numerical example is provided.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.252
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 venueDependence ModelingSame topicProbability and Risk ModelsFrench-language works237,207