MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3168507971 · doi:10.3390/jrfm14060259

A Deep Learning Integrated Cairns-Blake-Dowd (CBD) Sytematic Mortality Risk Model

2021· article· en· W3168507971 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Joab Odhiambo, Patrick Weke, Philip Ngare

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregressive integrated moving averageComputer scienceArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceMachine learningCohortActuarial scienceEconometricsEconomicsStatisticsTime seriesMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many actuarial science researchers on stochastic modeling and forecasting of systematic mortality risk use Cairns-Blake-Dowd (CBD) Model (2006) due to its ability to consider the cohort effects. A three-factor stochastic mortality model has three parameters that describe the mortality trends over time when dealing with future behaviors. This study aims to predict the trends of the model, kt(2) by applying the Recurrent Neural Networks within a Short-Term Long Memory (an artificial LSTM architecture) compared to traditional statistical ARIMA (p,d,q) models. The novel deep learning (machine learning) technique helps integrate the CBD model to enhance its accuracy and predictive capacity for future systematic mortality risk in countries with limited data availability, such as Kenya. The results show that Long Short-Term Memory network architecture had higher levels of precision when predicting the future systematic mortality risks than traditional methods. Ultimately, the results can be implemented by Kenyan insurance firms when modeling and forecasting systematic mortality risk helpful in the pricing of Annuities and Assurances.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207