MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121589371 · doi:10.1002/fut.21880

Catastrophe futures and reinsurance contracts: An incomplete markets approach

2017· article· en· W3121589371 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Futures Markets · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInsurance and Financial Risk Management
Canadian institutionsNational Bank of CanadaConcordia University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReinsuranceFutures contractMartingale (probability theory)EconomicsFinancial economicsMartingale pricingRisk-neutral measureEconometricsEvent (particle physics)Mathematical economicsActuarial scienceMartingale difference sequenceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a theoretical methodology for the pricing of catastrophe (CAT) derivatives with event‐dependent and non‐convex payoffs given the price of a CAT indexed futures contract. We do not assume a fully diversifiable CAT event risk, nor do we assume knowledge of the martingale probability measure beyond the futures price. We derive tight bounds on the contract value and present trading strategies exploiting the mispricing whenever the bounds are violated. We estimate the bounds of the reinsurance contract with data from hurricane landings in Florida. Our method is also applicable when there is no futures market but the price of a CAT‐indexed bond is available.

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)0.002
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 score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score0.955

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.211 · 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