MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125398441 · doi:10.1017/s1748499515000135

Capturing non-exchangeable dependence in multivariate loss processes with nested Archimedean Lévy copulas

2015· article· en· W3125398441 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin Avanzi, Jamie Tao, Bernard Wong, Xinda Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Actuarial Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCopula (linguistics)Tail dependenceMultivariate statisticsBivariate analysisEconometricsLévy processMarginal distributionMultivariate normal distributionMathematicsDependence analysisStatistical physicsEconomicsComputer scienceRandom variableApplied mathematicsStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The class of spectrally positive Lévy processes is a frequent choice for modelling loss processes in areas such as insurance or operational risk. Dependence between such processes (e.g. between different lines of business) can be modelled with Lévy copulas. This approach is a parsimonious, efficient and flexible method which provides many of the advantages akin to distributional copulas for random variables. Literature on Lévy copulas seems to have primarily focussed on bivariate processes. When multivariate settings are considered, these usually exhibit an exchangeable dependence structure (whereby all subset of the processes have an identical marginal Lévy copula). In reality, losses are not always associated in an identical way, and models allowing for non-exchangeable dependence patterns are needed. In this paper, we present an approach which enables the development of such models. Inspired by ideas and techniques from the distributional copula literature we investigate the procedure of nesting Archimedean Lévy copulas. We provide a detailed analysis of this construction, and derive conditions under which valid multivariate (nested) Lévy copulas are obtained. Our results are discussed and illustrated, notably with an example of model fitting to 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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.358
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.087 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Actuarial ScienceSame topicProbability and Risk ModelsFrench-language works237,207