MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080155931 · doi:10.1111/rmir.12155

A data set for modeling claims processes—TSA claims data

2020· article· en· W3080155931 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRisk Management and Insurance Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear and radioactivity studies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData setActuarial scienceSet (abstract data type)DeductibleGovernment (linguistics)StatisticsEconometricsComputer scienceComputer securityBusinessEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This data insight highlights the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) claims data as an underused data set that would be particularly useful to researchers developing statistical models to analyze claim frequency and severity. Individuals who have been injured or had items damaged, lost or stolen may make a claim for losses to the TSA. The federal government reports information on every claim from 2002 to 2017 at https://www.dhs.gov/tsa-claims-data . Information collected includes claim date and type and site as well as closed claim amount and disposition (whether it was approved in full, denied, or settled. We provide summary statistics on the frequency and the severity of the data for the years 2003 to 2015. The data set has several unique features including severity is not truncated (there is no deductible), there are significant mass points in the severity data, and the frequency data shows a high degree of auto correlation if compiled on a weekly basis, and substantial frequency mass points at zero for daily data.

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.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.623
Threshold uncertainty score0.602

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.180 · 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