MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390962405 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2401.07724

A non-parametric estimator for Archimedean copulas under flexible censoring scenarios and an application to claims reserving

2024· preprint· en· W4390962405 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marie Michaelides, Hélène Cossette, Mathieu Pigeon

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCopula (linguistics)EstimatorCensoring (clinical trials)Bivariate analysisParametric statisticsComputer scienceUnivariateEconometricsModel selectionGoodness of fitNonparametric statisticsParametric modelStatisticsMathematicsMultivariate statisticsArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With insurers benefiting from ever-larger amounts of data of increasing complexity, we explore a data-driven method to model dependence within multilevel claims in this paper. More specifically, we start from a non-parametric estimator for Archimedean copula generators introduced by Genest and Rivest (1993), and we extend it to diverse flexible censoring scenarios using techniques derived from survival analysis. We implement a graphical selection procedure for copulas that we validate using goodness-of-fit methods applied to complete, single-censored, and double-censored bivariate data. We illustrate the performance of our model with multiple simulation studies. We then apply our methodology to a recent Canadian automobile insurance dataset where we seek to model the dependence between the activation delays of correlated coverages. We show that our model performs quite well in selecting the best-fitted copula for the data at hand, especially when the dataset is large, and that the results can then be used as part of a larger claims reserving methodology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207