Modeling the Optimal Combination of Proportional and Stop-Loss Reinsurance with Dependent Claim and Stochastic Insurance Premium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates an optimal reinsurance policy using a risk model with dependent claim and insurance premium by assuming that the insurance premium is random. Their dependence structure is modeled using Sarmanov’s bivariate exponential distribution and the Farlie–Gumbel–Morgenstern (FGM) copula-based bivariate exponential distribution. The reinsurance premium paid by the insurer to the reinsurer is fixed and is charged by the expected value premium principle (EVPP) and standard deviation premium principle (SDPP). The main objective of this paper is to determine the proportion and retention limit of the optimal combination of proportional and stop-loss reinsurance for the insurer. Specifically, with a constrained reinsurance premium, we use the minimization of the Value-at-Risk (VaR) of the insurer’s net cost. When determining the optimal proportion and retention limit, we provide some numerical examples to illustrate the theoretical results. We show that the dependence parameter, the probability of claim occurrence, and the confidence level have effects on the optimal VaR of the insurer’s net cost.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".