Bibliographic record
Abstract
Risk Measures and Insurance Solvency Benchmarks: Fixed-Probability Levels in Renewal Risk Models is written for academics and practitioners who are concerned about potential weaknesses of the Solvency II regulatory system. It is also intended for readers who are interested in pure and applied probability, have a taste for classical and asymptotic analysis, and are motivated to delve into rather intensive calculations. The formal prerequisite for this book is a good background in analysis. The desired prerequisite is some degree of probability training, but someone with knowledge of the classical real-variable theory, including asymptotic methods, will also find this book interesting. For those who find the proofs too complicated, it may be reassuring that most results in this book are formulated in rather elementary terms. This book can also be used as reading material for basic courses in risk measures, insurance mathematics, and applied probability. The material of this book was partly used by the author for his courses in several universities in Moscow, Copenhagen University, and in the University of Montreal. Features Requires only minimal mathematical prerequisites in analysis and probability Suitable for researchers and postgraduate students in related fields Could be used as a supplement to courses in risk measures, insurance mathematics and applied probability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".