MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7097047889

Associateship Examinations Exam 1 Probability

2011· article· en· W7097047889 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTable (database)SyllabusSection (typography)Web siteTest (biology)Final examinationEducational measurement
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exam 1 is a three-hour, multiple-choice examination that is administered by Preliminary Actuarial Examinations/SOA and is identical to SOA Exam P. The examination is jointly sponsored and administered by the CAS, SOA, and the Canadian Institute of Actuaries (CIA). The examination is also jointly sponsored by the American Academy of Actuaries (AAA) and the Conference of Consulting Actuaries (CCA). Exam 1 is administered as a computer-based test. For additional details, please refer to “Computer-Based Testing Rules and Procedures." The purpose of the syllabus for this examination is to develop a knowledge of the fundamental probability tools for quantitatively assessing risk. The application of these tools to problems encountered in actuarial science is emphasized. A thorough command of the supporting calculus is assumed. Additionally, a very basic knowledge of insurance and risk management is assumed. A table of values for the normal distribution is available below for download and will be included with the examination. Since the table will be included with the examination, candidates will not be allowed to bring copies of the table into the examination room. Please check the “Syllabus Updates ” section of the CAS Web Site for any changes to the exam or

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.621
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.219 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicProbability and Risk ModelsFrench-language works237,207