MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389432236 · doi:10.3390/risks11120213

The Applications of Generalized Poisson Regression Models to Insurance Claim Data

2023· article· en· W4389432236 on OpenAlex

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

VenueRisks · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCount dataPoisson regressionNegative binomial distributionPoisson distributionZero-inflated modelCovariateGeneralized linear modelEconometricsComputer scienceZero (linguistics)MathematicsStatisticsMedicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predictive modeling has been widely used for insurance rate making. In this paper, we focus on insurance claim count data and address their common issues with more flexible modeling techniques. In particular, we study the zero-inflated and hurdle-generalized Poisson and negative binomial distributions in a functional form for modeling insurance claim count data. It is shown that these models are useful in addressing the problem of excess zeros and over-dispersion of the claim count variable. In addition, we show that including the exposure as a covariate in both the zero and the count part of the model is an effective approach to incorporating exposure information in zero-inflated and hurdle models. We illustrate the effectiveness and versatility of the introduced models using three real datasets. The results suggest their promising applications in insurance risk classification and beyond.

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)0.004
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.492
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.001 · 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