反歧视保险定价:法规、公平标准和模型

IF 1.4 Q3 BUSINESS, FINANCE North American Actuarial Journal Pub Date : 2023-06-08 DOI:10.1080/10920277.2023.2190528
Xi Xin, Fei Huang
{"title":"反歧视保险定价:法规、公平标准和模型","authors":"Xi Xin, Fei Huang","doi":"10.1080/10920277.2023.2190528","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"On the issue of insurance discrimination, a grey area in regulation has resulted from the growing use of big data analytics by insurance companies: direct discrimination is prohibited, but indirect discrimination using proxies or more complex and opaque algorithms is not clearly specified or assessed. This phenomenon has recently attracted the attention of insurance regulators all over the world. Meanwhile, various fairness criteria have been proposed and flourished in the machine learning literature with the rapid growth of artificial intelligence (AI) in the past decade and have mostly focused on classification decisions. In this article, we introduce some fairness criteria that are potentially applicable to insurance pricing as a regression problem to the actuarial field, match them with different levels of potential and existing antidiscrimination regulations, and implement them into a series of existing and newly proposed antidiscrimination insurance pricing models, using both generalized linear models (GLMs) and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost). Our empirical analysis compares the outcome of different models via the fairness–accuracy trade-off and shows their impact on adverse selection and solidarity.","PeriodicalId":46812,"journal":{"name":"North American Actuarial Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Antidiscrimination Insurance Pricing: Regulations, Fairness Criteria, and Models\",\"authors\":\"Xi Xin, Fei Huang\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10920277.2023.2190528\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"On the issue of insurance discrimination, a grey area in regulation has resulted from the growing use of big data analytics by insurance companies: direct discrimination is prohibited, but indirect discrimination using proxies or more complex and opaque algorithms is not clearly specified or assessed. This phenomenon has recently attracted the attention of insurance regulators all over the world. Meanwhile, various fairness criteria have been proposed and flourished in the machine learning literature with the rapid growth of artificial intelligence (AI) in the past decade and have mostly focused on classification decisions. In this article, we introduce some fairness criteria that are potentially applicable to insurance pricing as a regression problem to the actuarial field, match them with different levels of potential and existing antidiscrimination regulations, and implement them into a series of existing and newly proposed antidiscrimination insurance pricing models, using both generalized linear models (GLMs) and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost). Our empirical analysis compares the outcome of different models via the fairness–accuracy trade-off and shows their impact on adverse selection and solidarity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46812,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"North American Actuarial Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"North American Actuarial Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10920277.2023.2190528\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"North American Actuarial Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10920277.2023.2190528","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在保险歧视问题上,由于保险公司越来越多地使用大数据分析,监管出现了一个灰色地带:禁止直接歧视,但没有明确规定或评估使用代理或更复杂和不透明算法的间接歧视。这一现象最近引起了世界各地保险监管机构的注意。与此同时,随着人工智能(AI)在过去十年的快速发展,各种公平标准在机器学习文献中被提出并蓬勃发展,并且主要集中在分类决策上。在本文中,我们引入了一些可能适用于保险定价的公平标准作为精算领域的回归问题,将它们与不同水平的潜在和现有的反歧视法规进行匹配,并使用广义线性模型(GLMs)和极端梯度提升(XGBoost)将它们实现到一系列现有和新提出的反歧视保险定价模型中。我们的实证分析通过公平-准确性权衡比较了不同模型的结果,并显示了它们对逆向选择和团结的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Antidiscrimination Insurance Pricing: Regulations, Fairness Criteria, and Models
On the issue of insurance discrimination, a grey area in regulation has resulted from the growing use of big data analytics by insurance companies: direct discrimination is prohibited, but indirect discrimination using proxies or more complex and opaque algorithms is not clearly specified or assessed. This phenomenon has recently attracted the attention of insurance regulators all over the world. Meanwhile, various fairness criteria have been proposed and flourished in the machine learning literature with the rapid growth of artificial intelligence (AI) in the past decade and have mostly focused on classification decisions. In this article, we introduce some fairness criteria that are potentially applicable to insurance pricing as a regression problem to the actuarial field, match them with different levels of potential and existing antidiscrimination regulations, and implement them into a series of existing and newly proposed antidiscrimination insurance pricing models, using both generalized linear models (GLMs) and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost). Our empirical analysis compares the outcome of different models via the fairness–accuracy trade-off and shows their impact on adverse selection and solidarity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
14.30%
发文量
38
期刊最新文献
A Proposed Condition-Based Risk Adjustment System for the Colombian Health Insurance Program Reducing Medical Costs of Health Insurance: The COVID-19 Stress Testing and Portfolio Effects Credibility Theory for Variance Premium Principle Discussion on “Sample Size Determination for Credibility Estimation,” by Liang Hong, Volume 26(4) Author’s Reply to Discussion on “Sample Size Determination for Credibility Estimation”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1