MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124149467

Competing Risks of Mortgage Termination: Who Refinances, Who Moves, and Who Defaults?

2002· article· en· W3124149467 on OpenAlexaff
Andrey D. Pavlov

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDefaultLoan-to-value ratioMortgage insuranceValue (mathematics)Mortgage underwritingShared appreciation mortgageProperty (philosophy)Actuarial scienceEconomicsInterest rateMonetary economicsBusinessEconometricsFinanceMathematicsStatisticsInsurance policy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Why, when, and who terminates their mortgages? The primary reasons for mortgage termination are refinancing, selling of the property, and default. This article is the first to explicitly model these competing risks within a unified conceptual framework and provide a link between theoretical value-maximizing mortgage-termination models and empirical estimation. I find, for instance, that the refinancing risk is highly sensitive to interest-rate changes and other variables capturing the value of the mortgage. On the other hand, the necessity to relocate, either through sale of the property of default, is sensitive to the local economic conditions but largely independent of the value of the mortgage. Furthermore, I explicitly model the spatial distribution of the mortgage-termination risks. This approach captures striking spatial patterns of mortgage termination. It also mitigates, at least partially, one of the biggest obstacles to mortgage termination estimation: omitted variables. Copyright 2001 by Kluwer Academic Publishers

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.193
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.201 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations12
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207