MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804584838 · doi:10.3390/risks6020059

On the Moments and the Distribution of Aggregate Discounted Claims in a Markovian Environment

2018· article· en· W2804584838 on OpenAlexafffund
Shuanming Li, Yi Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueRisks · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMarkov processLaplace transformApplied mathematicsDistribution (mathematics)MathematicsMarkov chainAggregate (composite)Order (exchange)State spaceDiscountingState (computer science)Matrix (chemical analysis)Statistical physicsMathematical optimizationMathematical analysisAlgorithmStatisticsEconomicsPhysicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies the moments and the distribution of the aggregate discounted claims (ADCs) in a Markovian environment, where the claim arrivals, claim amounts, and forces of interest (for discounting) are influenced by an underlying Markov process. Specifically, we assume that claims occur according to a Markovian arrival process (MAP). The paper shows that the vector of joint Laplace transforms of the ADC occurring in each state of the environment process by any specific time satisfies a matrix-form first-order partial differential equation, through which a recursive formula is derived for the moments of the ADC occurring in certain states (a subset). We also study two types of covariances of the ADC occurring in any two subsets of the state space and with two different time lengths. The distribution of the ADC occurring in certain states by any specific time is also investigated. Numerical results are also presented for a two-state Markov-modulated model case.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRisksSame topicProbability and Risk ModelsFrench-language works237,207