MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402029488 · doi:10.1080/10920277.2024.2325343

A Markovian Aging Process Forecasting Model: Predicting U.S. Mortality

2024· article· en· W4402029488 on OpenAlexaff
Arman Rostami, Amin Hassan Zadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Actuarial Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarkov processProcess (computing)Computer scienceEconometricsStatisticsEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we provide a novel finite-state Markov model for predicting death rates. The Markovian physiological age, which forms the basis of this model, is represented by the states in the underlying continuous-time Markov chain. This model forecasts mortality rates for the Markovian physiological age, for which mortality rates for calendar ages can be easily computed. A set of data from the U.S. population is used to calibrate the model. The data collection includes individuals aged 30 to 108 and covers the years 1970 to 2019. We train the model using data from 1970 to 2014 and then test it using data from 2015 to 2019. Based on metrics utilized for training and test datasets, the suggested model outperforms the models of both Lee and Carter (Citation1992) and Renshaw and Haberman (Citation2006). It is noteworthy that this method uses fewer model parameters than the comparable models. Forecasts of mortality rates and life expectancy are made using the findings. According to the findings, a 30-year-old’s life expectancy in 2040, 2060, and 2080 will be 55, 59, and 63 years, respectively, which is longer than the basic Lee-Carter model predicted. The model in this work, unlike the Lee Carter model, is identifiable.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.428
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.304 · 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.

Study designObservational
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 venueNorth American Actuarial JournalSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207