MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125725626

Underinsurance Caused by Uninsurable Losses in the Public Goods and Personal Assets

2019· article· en· W3125725626 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fan‐chin Kung, Haiyong Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Economics and Finance · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDamagesMoral hazardActuarial sciencePublic goodInsurance policyEconomicsProperty insuranceBusinessCasualty insuranceMicroeconomicsIncentive
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A significant portion of flood damages were not covered by insurance, and policies are devised to promote insurance coverage. There are, however, rational reasons for why households may not purchase full insurance facing risks. We discuss optimal underinsurance when there are uninsurable losses in the public goods or personal assets. In a first-best allocation, households will fully restore the damaged public goods after a natural hazard and purchase full insurance. When public goods restoration is not available, the Samuelson condition holds in expected utility, and households purchase insurance less than their wealth loss. Also, when there are uninsurable losses in personal assets, that optimal insurance purchase is less than the wealth loss. We provide a model based on households' choices of coverage and deductibles in insurance purchases. This model can be used to estimate households' risk preferences towards natural hazards.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Economics and FinanceSame topicAgricultural risk and resilienceFrench-language works237,207