MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Penentuan Besaran Premi Asuransi Jiwa Berjangka dengan Model True Fractional Premiums

2018· article· id· W3215883858 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Muhammad Al-Firdaus Erdian, Ika Purnamasari, Wenny Kristina

Bibliographic record

VenueEksponensial · 2018
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Studies and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaymentActuarial scienceQuarter (Canadian coin)BusinessLife insuranceEconometricsEconomicsFinanceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The model of the payment of life insurance premium that can be paid more than once a year is called fractional premiums. This model consists of two types, namely true fractional premiums and apportionable premium. The true fractional premiums is divided into two models of payment of compensation, namely discrete payment model and continuous payment model. This study aims to find out the comparison of 20 years life insurance premium with true fractional premiums model based on gender and number of payments made in a year from both payment models. The data used in this research is the simulation data. Based on the research result, it is found that the amount of life insurance premium using discrete compensation payment model is cheaper than the one using the continuous payment model. While based on gender, the premium of male is more expensive than female. Based on the amount of payments made in one year, payments made each month are more expensive than the payments made each quarter and semester.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEksponensialSame topicLegal Studies and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207