Evaluation of Weather Yield Index Insurance Exposed to Deluge Risk: The Case of Sugarcane in Thailand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Insurance serves as a mechanism to effectively manage and transfer revenue-related risks. We conducted a study to explore the potential financial advantages of index insurance, which protects agricultural producers, specifically sugarcane, against excessive rainfall. Creation of the index involved utilizing generalized additive regression models, allowing for consideration of non-linear effects and handling complex data by adjusting the complexity of the model through the addition or reduction of terms. Moreover, quantile generalized additive regression was deliberated to evaluate relationships with lower quantiles, such as low-yield events. To quantify the financial benefits for farmers, should they opt for excessive rainfall index insurance, we employed efficiency analysis based on metrics such as conditional tail expectation (CTE), certainty equivalence of revenue (CER), and mean root square loss (MRSL). The results of the regression model demonstrate its accuracy in predicting sugar cane yields, with a split testing R2 of 0.691. MRSL should be taken into consideration initially, as it is a farmer’s revenue assessment that distinguishes between those with and those without insurance. As a result, the GAM model indicates the least fluctuation in farmer income at the 90th percentile. Additionally, our study suggests that this type of insurance could apply to sugarcane farmers and other crop producers in regions where extreme rainfall threatens the financial sustainability of agricultural production.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".