MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285088893 · doi:10.1080/03461238.2022.2089051

Finite-time ruin probabilities using bivariate Laguerre series

2022· article· en· W4285088893 on OpenAlexafffund
Eric C.K. Cheung, Hayden Lau, Gordon E. Willmot, Jae‐Kyung Woo

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Actuarial Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersAustralian Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsLaguerre polynomialsHermite polynomialsApplied mathematicsBivariate analysisSeries (stratigraphy)Erlang (programming language)Exponential functionPoisson distributionRuin theoryCumulantInverse Gaussian distributionDistribution (mathematics)Mathematical analysisStatisticsRisk modelComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we revisit the finite-time ruin probability in the classical compound Poisson risk model. Traditional general solutions to finite-time ruin problems are usually expressed in terms of infinite sums involving the convolutions related to the claim size distribution and their integrals, which can typically be evaluated only in special cases where the claims follow exponential or (more generally) mixed Erlang distribution. We propose to tackle the partial integro-differential equation satisfied by the finite-time ruin probability and develop a new approach to obtain a solution in terms of bivariate Laguerre series as a function of the initial surplus level and the time horizon for a large class of light-tailed claim distributions. To illustrate the versatility and accuracy of our proposed method which is easy to implement, numerical examples are provided for claim amount distributions such as generalized inverse Gaussian, Weibull and truncated normal where closed-form convolutions are not available in the literature.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScandinavian Actuarial JournalSame topicProbability and Risk ModelsFrench-language works237,207