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 OpenAlexafffund
Stylianos Perrakis, Ali Boloorforoosh

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.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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

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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Futures MarketsSame topicInsurance and Financial Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207