MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Study on postal life insurance attributes and its growth prediction using machine learning algorithms

2025· article· en· W4406837832 on OpenAlexaff
T. Rajasekaran, P. Vijayalakshmi, V. Rajendran

Bibliographic record

VenueIndonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInsurance and Financial Risk Management
Canadian institutionsVISTA Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMachine learningLife insuranceAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceData miningActuarial scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The oldest insurer in the country, since 1884, is Postal Insurance. For today's livelihood, the citizens of India's life-saving coverage and insurance have become necessary. For customers to overcome difficult situations, life insurance is crucial in creating confidence. This is one of the highlights of the Postal organization. Under postal life insurance (PLI), the volume of new policies is enrolled throughout India, and a supervised machine learning (ML) process for finding the business cluster is carried out based on this data, which is discussed. A ML algorithm that predicts the growth for the future, using a suitable algorithm for accessing the features and process to identify the prediction model, has been developed, which is the main goal of this study. Simulation results show that expected is one of the most important variables used to predict and that both random forest (RF) and logistic regression outperformed the other two models. The RF model is the most effective and fastest in predicting the system's future state, and it shows the highest value for the PLI product.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceSame topicInsurance and Financial Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207