MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006809263 · doi:10.1080/10920277.2019.1703753

The Valuation of a Guaranteed Minimum Maturity Benefit under a Regime-Switching Framework

2020· article· en· W3006809263 on OpenAlexafffund
Rogemar Mamon, Heng Xiong, Yixing Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Actuarial Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeometric Brownian motionEquity (law)Affine transformationEconomicsValuation (finance)EconometricsInterest rateStock (firearms)Actuarial scienceStock market indexMarkov chainPortfolioFinancial economicsStock marketMathematicsFinanceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global insurance markets have become more sophisticated in recent times in response to the evolving needs of populations that tend to live longer. Policy holders desire the benefits of longevity/mortality protection while taking advantage of investment growth opportunities in equity markets. As a result, insurers incorporate payment guarantees in new insurance products, known as equity-linked contracts, whose values are dependent on prices of risky assets. A guaranteed minimum maturity benefit (GMMB) is now common in many equity-linked contracts. We develop an integrated pricing framework for a GMMB focusing on segregated fund contracts. More specifically, we construct hidden Markov models (HMMs) for a stock index, interest rate, and mortality rate. The dependence between these risk factors is characterized explicitly. We assume that the stock index follows a Markov-modulated geometric Brownian motion and the interest and mortality rates have Markov-modulated affine dynamics. A series of measure changes is employed to obtain a semi-closed-form solution for the GMMB price. A Fourier transform method is applied to numerically approximate the prices more efficiently. Recursive HMM filtering is used in our model calibration. Numerical investigations in our article demonstrate the accuracy of GMMB prices and an extensive analysis is included to systematically examine how risk factors affect the value of a GMMB.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.409
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.306
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Actuarial JournalSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207