MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319791779 · doi:10.1017/s0269964822000079

Pareto-optimal reinsurance with default risk and solvency regulation

2023· article· en· W4319791779 on OpenAlex
Tim J. Boonen, Wenjun Jiang

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueProbability in the Engineering and Informational Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Portfolio Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsReinsuranceIndemnitySolvencyActuarial sciencePareto principleConstraint (computer-aided design)Asset (computer security)Investment (military)EconomicsFinanceComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper studies a Pareto-optimal reinsurance problem when the contract is subject to default of the reinsurer. We assume that the reinsurer can invest a share of its wealth in a risky asset and default occurs when the reinsurer's end-of-period wealth is insufficient to cover the indemnity. We show that without the solvency regulation, the optimal indemnity function is of excess-of-loss form, regardless of the investment decision. Under the solvency regulation constraint, by assuming the investment decision remains unchanged, the optimal indemnity function is characterized element-wisely. Partial results are derived when both the indemnity function and investment decision are impacted by the solvency regulation. Numerical examples are provided to illustrate the implications of our results and the sensitivity of solution to the model parameters.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.249 · 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