MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2959166078 · doi:10.3390/jrfm12030119

Dealing with Low Interest Rates in Life Insurance: An Analysis of Additional Reserves in the German Life Insurance Industry

2019· article· en· W2959166078 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christian Eckert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInsurance and Financial Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterest rateLife insuranceGermanActuarial scienceAsset (computer security)Christian ministryBusinessLiabilityEquity (law)EconomicsFinanceComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interest rates have been very low for several years, which is particularly challenging for life insurers. Since 2001, German life insurers have had to set an additional reserve due to low interest rates to ensure the protection of policyholders. However, the method introduced at that time to calculate these reserves was criticized, therefore, the German Federal Ministry of Finance replaced it with a new approach. In this article, we investigated the effects of the different methods on a typical German life insurer in various future interest rate scenarios and from various perspectives. For this purpose, we modelled such a life insurer holistically, considered its asset liability management and projected its future development in different interest rate scenarios using simulation techniques. Taking into account dependencies between assets, liabilities and interest rates, we analyzed and discussed our results from the life insurer’s, equity holders’, policyholders’ and regulators’ perspectives. The results show that the new method eliminated the weaknesses of the previous one and seems to be a suitable alternative to determine the additional reserve.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicInsurance and Financial Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207