MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196455938 · doi:10.1017/s1748499522000033

A multi-parameter-level model for simulating future mortality scenarios with COVID-alike effects

2022· article· en· W3196455938 on OpenAlexaff
Rui Zhou, Johnny Siu‐Hang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Actuarial Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicRange (aeronautics)EconometricsGauge (firearms)Actuarial science2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Computer scienceEconomicsEngineeringGeographyMedicineVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract There has been a growing interest among pension plan sponsors in envisioning how the mortality experience of their active and deferred members may turn out to be if a pandemic similar to the COVID-19 occurs in the future. To address their needs, we propose in this paper a stochastic model for simulating future mortality scenarios with COVID-alike effects. The proposed model encompasses three parameter levels. The first level includes parameters that capture the long-term pattern of mortality, whereas the second level contains parameters that gauge the excess age-specific mortality due to COVID-19. Parameters in the first and second levels are estimated using penalised quasi-likelihood maximisation method which was proposed for generalised linear mixed models. Finally, the third level includes parameters that draw on expert opinions concerning, for example, how likely a COVID-alike pandemic will occur in the future. We illustrate our proposed model with data from the United States and a range of expert opinions.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Actuarial ScienceSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207