MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2796203969 · doi:10.1017/s1748499518000076

On age difference in joint lifetime modelling with life insurance annuity applications

2018· article· en· W2796203969 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
François Dufresne, Enkelejd Hashorva, Gildas Ratovomirija, Youssouf A. F. Toukourou

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Actuarial Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCopula (linguistics)AnnuityActuarial scienceEconometricsNoveltyLife annuityJoint probability distributionEconomicsLife insurancePensionGeneralized Pareto distributionMathematicsStatisticsPsychologyExtreme value theoryFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Insurance and annuity products covering several lives require the modelling of the joint distribution of future lifetimes. In the interest of simplifying calculations, it is common in practice to assume that the future lifetimes among a group of people are independent. However, extensive research over the past decades suggests otherwise. In this paper, a copula approach is used to model the dependence between lifetimes within a married couple using data from a large Canadian insurance company. As a novelty, the age difference and the gender of the elder partner are introduced as an argument of the dependence parameter. Maximum likelihood techniques are thus implemented for the parameter estimation. Not only do the results make clear that the correlation decreases with age difference, but also the dependence between the lifetimes is higher when husband is older than wife. A goodness-of-fit procedure is applied in order to assess the validity of the model. Finally, considering several annuity products available on the life insurance market, the paper concludes with practical illustrations.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations23
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Actuarial ScienceSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207