MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7154575127 · doi:10.66573/001c.145072

Development of Telematics Safety Scores in Accordance with Regulatory Compliance

2025· article· en· W7154575127 on OpenAlexafffund
Hashan Peiris, Himchan Jeong, Bin Zou

Bibliographic record

VenueVariance · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSimon Fraser University
KeywordsTelematicsConstraint (computer-aided design)RevenueOffset (computer science)Poisson regressionWork (physics)Linear regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper proposes a ratemaking framework for claim frequency that uses informative telematics data and complies with a “discount-only” regulatory requirement of the sort proposed in the 2023–2024 session of the New York State Assembly. The proposed framework uses a feedforward neural network to extract a one-dimensional safety score from multidimensional telematics features and integrates that score with traditional features in generalized linear models (GLMs). To meet the discount-only requirement, we impose constraints on the safety score and its regression parameter. The results show that the proposed models, with a suitable safety score function, can outperform a standard GLM in both in-sample goodness of fit and out-of-sample prediction performance. Furthermore, the analysis reveals that while the discount-only constraint may drive insurers to raise base premiums to offset revenue losses from the relativity cap, the regulation could achieve its intended goal in scenarios with strong favorable selection. This work was supported by a 2024 Individual Research Grant from the Casualty Actuarial Society. Address for Correspondence: himchan_jeong@sfu.ca

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVarianceSame topicProbability and Risk ModelsFrench-language works237,207