MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394598694 · doi:10.1063/5.0204804

The calculation of critical illness insurance premiums with terminal illness condition

2024· article· en· W4394598694 on OpenAlexaff
Hani Dwi Retnani, Neva Satyahadewi, Hendra Perdana, Ray Tamtama

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsAssociation of Canadian Archivists
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerminal (telecommunication)Critical illnessActuarial scienceBusinessComputer scienceMedicineIntensive care medicineTelecommunicationsCritically ill

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long Term Care (LTC) insurance is a treatment insurance related to critical illness conditions. An insured with LTC insurance does not have to worry about the medical care he will need when diagnosed with an illness or undergoing medical treatment. Terminal illness is a critical illness condition when it has reached the final stage and is diagnosed by a specialist that the life expectancy of the insured is less than 12 months since the diagnosis was given. The types of critical illnesses used in this study are cancer, heart disease, stroke, and diabetes mellitus which are the dominant causes of death in Indonesia. The data that used in this research is the form of Indonesia's 2019 mortality table and the data of critical illness patients with terminal illness conditions prevalence from Riskesdas 2018. The single net premium value that need to be paid in this study was obtained by determining the transition probabilities of the multi-state model with 10 states from prevalence of disease and the prevalence of death. Based on the case study, as an example, the amount of single net premium that must be paid by an insured male aged 35 years in good health is IDR 12,692,741 for the protection period and the payment period is 10 years. The compensation value obtained when the insured diagnosed with a terminal illness or die is IDR 300,000,000 where the interest rate used is 3.75%.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207