Actuarial Outpost ASM Example 51E
 User Name Remember Me? Password
 Register Blogs Wiki FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
 FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

 DW SimpsonActuarial JobsVisit our site for the most up to date jobs for actuaries. Actuarial Salary SurveysProperty & Casualty, Health, Life, Pension and Non-Tradtional Jobs. Actuarial Meeting ScheduleBrowse this year's meetings and which recruiters will attend. Contact DW SimpsonHave a question? Let's talk. You'll be glad you did.

 Short-Term Actuarial Math Old Exam C Forum

 Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
#1
06-02-2018, 12:38 AM
 kklin CAS SOA Join Date: Jul 2014 College: University of Waterloo, Year 4 Posts: 4
ASM Example 51E

I do not understand the reasoning behind the 2 different ways in obtaining the Buhlmann Z (i.e. when ‘an individual is selected’ for part 1 vs when ‘a group is selected’ for part 2).

Precisely, why does part 2 treat the process as a mixed distribution? Furthermore, how do I know in the future when to treat the process as a mixed distribution?

Any help would be much appreciated!
Attached Images

Last edited by kklin; 06-02-2018 at 02:59 PM..
#2
06-06-2018, 08:26 PM
 Academic Actuary Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 8,339

As no one else seems to respond, I will give my input. This solution is needlessly complicated. If we are looking at the entire population the are 4 Poissons with lambdas
(.2,.4,.6,1.2) with probabilities (.375,.375,.125,.125). By creating two lists, the calculator with give you the mean (EVPV) and the variance (VHM) which will give us the k for case 1.

In case 2, we have group one with lambdas (.2,.4) and conditional probabilities (.5,.5) while for group two we have (.6,1.2) with probabilities (.5,.5). The the mean and variance for group one are (.3,.31) where the second term is the mean plus the variance of the lambdas while for group 2 it is (.9,.99). Using the probabilities (.75,.25) you can get the mean of the variances and variances of the mean.

In case one it is for the same risk while for case two it is for a risk from the same group.
I wouldn't get hung up on the term mixed distribution as I would consider case 1 also a mixed distribution.

 Tags buhlmann, buhlmann credibility

 Thread Tools Search this Thread Search this Thread: Advanced Search Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:53 PM.

 -- Default Style - Fluid Width ---- Default Style - Fixed Width ---- Old Default Style ---- Easy on the eyes ---- Smooth Darkness ---- Chestnut ---- Apple-ish Style ---- If Apples were blue ---- If Apples were green ---- If Apples were purple ---- Halloween 2007 ---- B&W ---- Halloween ---- AO Christmas Theme ---- Turkey Day Theme ---- AO 2007 beta ---- 4th Of July Contact Us - Actuarial Outpost - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top