Robust estimates of insurance misrepresentation through kernel quantile regression mixtures
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper pertains to a class of nonparametric methods for studying the misrepresentation issue in insurance applications. For this purpose, mixture models based on quantile regression in reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces are employed. Compared with the existing parametric approaches, the proposed framework features a more flexible statistics structure which could alleviate the risk of model misspecification, and is in the meantime more robust to outliers in the data. The proposed framework can not only estimate the prevalence of misrepresentation in the data, but also help identify the most suspicious individuals for the validation purpose. Through embedding state‐of‐the‐art machine learning techniques, we present a novel statistics procedure to efficiently estimate the proposed misrepresentation model in the presence of massive data. The proposed methodology is applied to study the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data, and a significant degree of misrepresentation activity is found on the self‐reported insurance status.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it