MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311495920 · doi:10.1002/fut.22390

A new option for mortality–interest rates

2022· article· en· W4311495920 on OpenAlexaff
Tzuling Lin, Cary Chi‐Liang Tsai

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Futures Markets · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHedgeInterest rateAnnuityLife annuityActuarial scienceMortality rateLongevity riskInterest rate riskLife insuranceEconomicsEconometricsFinanceMedicineInternal medicinePension

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We propose a new type of mortality–interest option related to a new random variable, the force of mortality–interest denoted as , the addition of the force of mortality and the force of interest. We assume moves approximately linearly, design the new mortality–interest option, and then derive closed‐form formulas for its expected values. We show that using the new mortality–interest options, an annuity provider and a life insurer can, respectively, hedge the longevity and mortality risks with interest rate risk; a financial intermediary selling the new options can benefit from natural hedges resulted from two‐side businesses with the annuity provider and life insurer.

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 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)0.003
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.780

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Futures MarketsSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207