Marked Cox models for IBNR claims count: continuous and discretized approaches with Dirichlet-driven reporting delays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We propose a novel micro-level Cox model for incurred but not reported (IBNR) claims count based on hidden Markov models. Initially formulated as a continuous-time model, it addresses the complexity of incorporating temporal dependencies and policyholder risk attributes. However, the continuous-time model faces significant challenges in maximizing the likelihood and fitting right-truncated reporting delays. To overcome these issues, we introduce two discrete-time versions: one incorporating unsystematic randomness in reporting delays through a Dirichlet distribution and one without. We provide the EM algorithm for parameter estimation for all three models and apply them to an auto-insurance dataset to estimate IBNR claim counts. Our results show that while all models perform well, the discrete-time versions demonstrate superior performance by jointly modeling delay and frequency, with the Dirichlet-based model capturing additional variability in reporting delays. This approach enhances the accuracy and reliability of IBNR reserving, offering a flexible framework adaptable to different levels of granularity within an insurance portfolio.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".