Optimal per-loss reinsurance and investment to minimize the probability of drawdown
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we study an optimal reinsurance-investment problem in a risk model with two dependent classes of insurance business, where the two claim number processes are correlated through a common shock component. We assume that the insurer can purchase per-loss reinsurance for each line of business and invest its surplus in a financial market consisting of a risk-free asset and a risky asset. Under the criterion of minimizing the probability of drawdown, the closed-form expressions for the optimal reinsurance-investment strategy and the corresponding value function are obtained. We show that the optimal reinsurance strategy is in the form of pure excess-of-loss reinsurance strategy under the expected value principle, and under the variance premium principle, the optimal reinsurance strategy is in the form of pure quota-share reinsurance. Furthermore, we extend our model to the case where the insurance company involves \begin{document}$ n $\end{document} \begin{document}$ (n\geq3) $\end{document} dependent classes of insurance business and the optimal results are derived explicitly as well.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".