Managing Weather Risk with a Neural Network-Based Index Insurance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Weather risk affects the economy, agricultural production in particular. Index insurance is a promising tool to hedge against weather risk, but current piecewise-linear index insurance contracts face large basis risk and low demand. We propose embedding a neural network-based optimization scheme into an expected utility maximization problem to design the index insurance contract. Neural networks capture a highly nonlinear relationship between the high-dimensional weather variables and production losses. We endogenously solve for the optimal insurance premium and demand. This approach reduces basis risk, lowers insurance premiums, and improves farmers’ utility. This paper was accepted by Agostino Capponi, finance. Funding: This work was supported by the Research Grants Council, University Grants Committee [Grants GRF 16502020, GRF 16504522, and T31-603/21-N], Singapore Ministry of Education Academic Research Fund Tier 1 [Grants RG143/19 and RG55/20], the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada [Grants RGPIN-2021-04144 and DGECR-2021-00330], the Research Database Matching Fund, and the School of Business and Management, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. Supplemental Material: The data files and online appendices are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2023.4902 .
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".