MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406981415 · doi:10.1007/s13385-025-00407-w

Fast estimation of the Renshaw-Haberman model and its variants

2025· article· en· W4406981415 on OpenAlex

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

VenueEuropean Actuarial Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimationEconometricsStatisticsMathematicsEconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In mortality modelling, cohort effects are often taken into consideration as they add insights about variations in mortality across different generations. Statistically speaking, models such as the Renshaw-Haberman model may provide a better fit to historical data compared to their counterparts that incorporate no cohort effects. However, when such models are estimated using an iterative maximum likelihood method in which parameters are updated one at a time, convergence is typically slow and may not even be reached within a reasonably established maximum number of iterations. Among others, the slow convergence problem hinders the study of parameter uncertainty through bootstrapping methods. In this paper, we propose an intuitive estimation method that minimizes the sum of squared errors between actual and fitted log central death rates. The complications arising from the incorporation of cohort effects are overcome by formulating part of the optimization as a principal component analysis with missing values. Using mortality data from various populations, we demonstrate that our proposed method produces satisfactory estimation results and is significantly more efficient compared to the traditional likelihood-based approach.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.614

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.271 · 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