MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255125159 · doi:10.1002/asmb.713

On a generalization of the expected discounted penalty function in a discrete‐time insurance risk model

2008· article· en· W4255125159 on OpenAlex
David Landriault

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralizationMathematicsPenalty methodApplied mathematicsFunction (biology)Binomial distributionRisk modelBinomial (polynomial)Discrete time and continuous timeMathematical economicsEconometricsMathematical optimizationStatisticsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper, we propose a generalization of the expected discounted penalty function and analyze the proposed analytic tool in the framework of the compound binomial model with a general premium rate c ( c ∈ ℕ + ) received per period. We derive an explicit expression for this generalized analytic tool in terms of the zeros of a matrix determinant. We then examine the original expected discounted penalty function in the compound binomial model with a general premium rate c , generalizing the results of Cheng et al. ( Insur. Math. Econ. 2000; 26 :239–250) in the framework of the compound binomial model with a unit premium rate. A numerical example is then considered to compare the original expected discounted penalty function with its generalized analytic tool. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.366
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.226 · 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