Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Exams - Please Limit Discussion to Exam-Related Topics > SoA/CAS Preliminary Exams > Long-Term Actuarial Math
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions


Fill in a brief DW Simpson Registration Form
to be contacted when new jobs meet your criteria.


Long-Term Actuarial Math Old Exam MLC Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-09-2007, 08:01 AM
ndaka26 ndaka26 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 302
Default Fractional Age Assumptions

How do we deal with a fractional age assumption question (udd, constant, hyperbolic) when s+t > 1? Plugging the values into given formulas does not work.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-09-2007, 08:05 AM
Abraham Weishaus Abraham Weishaus is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 7,221
Default

Take care of the integral part, then use the fractional age assumption for the fractional part.

For example, express as

or express as
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-09-2007, 08:27 AM
ndaka26 ndaka26 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 302
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abraham Weishaus View Post
Take care of the integral part, then use the fractional age assumption for the fractional part.

For example, express as

or express as
Thanks Professor for the response. But I still don't get why we use survival propabilities when we are trying to find the probability of death/failure the expression 2.2qx = 2Px * 0.2qx+2 implies that 2.2qx = 2/2.2qx?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-09-2007, 08:50 AM
Gandalf's Avatar
Gandalf Gandalf is offline
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
SOA
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 31,179
Default

He was just giving you the formula for the final fractional piece. E.g., the complete expression for the second would be = +
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-09-2007, 12:14 PM
Jim Daniel's Avatar
Jim Daniel Jim Daniel is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Davis, CA
College: Wabash College B.A. 1962, Stanford Ph.D. 1965
Posts: 2,713
Default

Once a probability takes you outside a single integer year of age, it's often simplest to find the equivalent set of lx values from your year-long probabilities, express your complicated probability in terms of lx values, and then interpolate as needed (linear on lx, on 1/lx, or on ln(lx)) to get those lx values.

Jim Daniel
__________________
Jim Daniel
Jim Daniel's Actuarial Seminars
www.actuarialseminars.com
jimdaniel@actuarialseminars.com
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-09-2007, 12:54 PM
ndaka26 ndaka26 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 302
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf View Post
He was just giving you the formula for the final fractional piece. E.g., the complete expression for the second would be = +
Gandalf thanks, I get it
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-09-2007, 01:04 PM
ndaka26 ndaka26 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 302
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf View Post
He was just giving you the formula for the final fractional piece. E.g., the complete expression for the second would be = +
would that be the same as qx + px * 0.2qx+1, though?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-09-2007, 01:31 PM
Gandalf's Avatar
Gandalf Gandalf is offline
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
SOA
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 31,179
Default

No, because is not the same as qx (and similarly for the term you changed to px).
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-15-2019, 09:03 PM
urbjhawk urbjhawk is offline
SOA
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Studying for LTAM
Posts: 9
Default

Can anyone help me with what u_(x+t) would be if t>1? We have that u(x+t) = q_x/(1-t*q_x) for when t<1 under the UDD assumption, but I can't seem to find a solution for when t>1.
__________________
VEE's P FM SRM IFM STAM LTAM PA
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-15-2019, 09:19 PM
Gandalf's Avatar
Gandalf Gandalf is offline
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
SOA
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 31,179
Default

If you stop and think about it, you're asking a rather silly question. Fractional age assumptions are for the pattern of mortality between integral ages. So they tell you how to get (for example) mu_50.2 from q50. They wouldn't tell you how to get mu_51.2 (that's 50+1.2) from q50, because that's not in the year starting with age 50.

You could say mu_(50+1.2)=mu_(51.2)=mu_(51+.2) and then evaluate it under udd by the formula you already gave as q_51/(1-.2*q_51).
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 09:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.21015 seconds with 9 queries