Cyber risk modeling: a discrete multivariate count process approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the past decade, cyber risk has raised much interest in the economy, and cyber risk has evolved from a type of pure operational risk to both operational and liability risk. However, the modeling of cyber risk is still in its infancy. Compared with other financial risks, cyber risk has some unique features. In particular, discrete variables regularly arise both in the frequency component (e.g. number of events per unit time), and the severity component (e.g. the number of data breaches for each cyber event). In addition, the modeling of these count variables are further complicated by nonstandard properties such as zero inflation, serial and cross-sectional correlations, as well as heavy tails. Previous cyber risk models have largely focused on continuous models that are incompatible with many of these characteristics. This paper introduces a new count-based frequency-severity framework to model cyber risk, with a dynamic multivariate negative binomial autoregressive process for the frequency component, and the generalized Poisson inverse-Gaussian distribution for the severity component. We unify these new modeling tools by proposing a tractable Generalized Method of Moments for their estimation and applying them to the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (PRC) dataset.
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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".