MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406855546 · doi:10.1080/03461238.2025.2455056

Optimal income drawdown and investment with longevity basis risk

2025· article· en· W4406855546 on OpenAlex
Ankush Agarwal, Christian‐Oliver Ewald, Yongjie Wang

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Actuarial Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersKempestiftelserna
KeywordsDrawdown (hydrology)Longevity riskInvestment (military)EconomicsActuarial scienceLongevityEconometricsMathematicsFinanceGeologyMedicinePensionPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate a utility maximisation problem for a pension scheme which offers an income drawdown policy. Apart from market risk, we specifically focus on longevity basis risk which arises when the forces of mortality of the scheme's target population and the reference population of a longevity bond used for hedging, are not perfectly correlated. By modelling the forces of mortality of the reference and target populations as stochastic affine processes, we derive analytic solutions for the relevant investment strategy and benefit withdrawal rate. Our model also accounts for dependencies between mortality rate fluctuations and stock prices. Our extensive numerical results demonstrate that the longevity bond acts as an effective hedging instrument, even in the presence of longevity basis risk.

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.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.265 · 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