Actuarial Discussion Forum - Professional Discussions for Professional Actuaries

Actuarial Jobs from Actuary.com    Submit Your Actuarial Resume Anonymously
Other Insurance Jobs    Other Financial Jobs    Other Health Jobs    Other IT Jobs    Other Jobs, Careers and Employment    Actuarial News
Directory of Actuarial Exam Study Courses - Online    Directory of Actuarial Exam Study Materials    Directory of Actuarial Exam Study Seminars - Live
Directory of Actuarial Recruiters    Directory of Actuarial Schools    Actuarial Grads Network    Actuary.com 



D.W. Simpson & Co, Inc. - Worldwide Actuarial Jobs
Life Jobs 
Health Jobs Pension Jobs Casualty Jobs Salary Apply
Pauline Reimer, ASA, MAAA - Pryor Associates
Nat'l/Int'l Actuarial Openings: Life P&C Health Pensions Finance
ACTEX Publications and MadRiver Books
Serving students worldwide for over 40 years
Advertise Here - Reach Actuarial Professionals
Advertising Information
Actuarial Careers, Inc.® - Actuarial Jobs Worldwide
Search positions by geographic region, specialization, or salary
Ezra Penland Actuarial Recruiters - Top Actuarial Jobs
Salary Surveys  Apply Online   Bios   Casualty   Health   Life   Pension

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Course 4 November 2000 Question #14

  1. #1
    Actuary.com - Level I Poster
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    27

    Course 4 November 2000 Question #14

    Im wondering if anyone has looked at this problem while practicing problems like I am.

    Without going into too much detail for the entire problem, is the information stated in parts (i) and (ii) not necessary? I usually expect problems too give you minimally sufficient information in order for you to solve the problem (for the most part that is). I was under the impression that you know the distribution behavior (poisson|gamma) then you should estimate the parameters by the method of moments which leads me to a variance calculation as if it were biased (dividing by n). I got the correct answer but not the same exact number. the solutions I think used an unbiased sample variance (dividing by n-1).

    Is my assumption that I know the frequency distribution behavior false????

    The link at least that works today is

    [url]http://www.soa.org/files/pdf/course4_1100.pdf[/url]

  2. #2
    Actuary.com - Posting Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    3,092
    Which parameters are you talking about? You find E(.) and V(.) of the compound dist. What are you doing?

  3. #3
    Actuary.com - Level I Poster
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    27
    so when you find E(.) and Var(.) of the compound distribution you use the formula

    E[S] = E[N]E[X] and Var[S] = E[N]Var[X]+Var[N]E[X]^2

    You know that
    E[X]^2 = 1500^2 and Var[X] = 6750000 bc they give you that already (X is Pareto)

    BUT
    When you calculate E[N] and Var[N], what do you do?

    so I felt like N|lambda is Poisson and Lambda is Gamma so N is Negative Binomial. Therefore E[N] = r*Beta and Var[N] = r*Beta*(1+Beta)

    so now
    E[S] = r*Beta*1500 and Var[S] = r*Beta*6750000+r*Beta*(1+Beta)*1500^2

    then with the given data in part (iii), you can estimate the parameters for r and Beta.

    So here is my dilemma. Ordinarily with this set up I was under the impression that you plug in r and Beta as estimates obtained from the method of moments estimates.

    So really all this is just saying is that
    750/1000 = Sample mean = r*Beta = E[N]
    And
    1494/1000 = Sample second moment = E[N^2] = r*Beta*(1+Beta) + r^2*Beta^2

    So
    E[N] = r*Beta = 750/1000 = 0.75
    and
    Var[N] = *Beta*(1+Beta) = 1494/1000 – (750/1000)^2 = 0.9315

    E[S] = 0.75*1500 = 1125 and Var[S] = 0.75*6750000 + 0.9315*1500^2 =7158375

    Now by the inequality for full credibility we have:

    n_full >= (1.96/0.05)^2 * 7158375/1125^2 = 8691.23584

    If you look at the solutions, they have a slightly different answer than mine. The difference I see is that their Var[N] is equal to 0.932432 which to me suggests they just computed it by finding the (unbiased) sample variance from the data in part (iii) and completely ignoring information from part (i) and (ii).

    Am I making a false assumption somewhere??? I feel like if you know the distribution for the frequency and have a sample, you would compute their expectations and variances by first estimating their parameters. If I was only given sample data and did not know the distribution, then I would have been ok here and done exactly what the solutions did.

+ Reply to Thread

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. November Sitting Exam Question
    By (/iropracy in forum SOA Exam FM / CAS Exam 2 - Financial Mathematics - with practice exam problems
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: November 18th 2008, 01:09 PM
  2. Exam P Question #5 May 2000
    By ChrisPoss in forum SOA Exam P / CAS Exam 1 - Probability - with practice exam problems
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 31st 2007, 02:23 AM
  3. Binomial tree hypothetical question (MFE) - possible exam question?
    By Hawgdriver in forum SOA Exam MFE - Actuarial Models, Financial Economics - with practice exam problems
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 23rd 2007, 04:28 PM
  4. Defective Question?
    By Junkmonkey in forum SOA Exam FM / CAS Exam 2 - Financial Mathematics - with practice exam problems
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: March 14th 2007, 11:25 AM
  5. Exam P May 2000 question
    By Big in forum Actuarial - Ask the Professor
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: December 23rd 2005, 11:55 PM

Bookmarks - Share

Bookmarks - Share

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts