Search arXivSearch

arXiv subjects

Yanjia Yu

Publications and source records attributed to Yanjia Yu.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Combining Predictions of Auto Insurance Claims

This paper aims to better predict highly skewed auto insurance claims by combining candidate predictions. We analyze a version of the Kangaroo Auto Insurance company data and study the effects of combining different methods using five measures of prediction accuracy. The results show the following. First, when there is an outstanding (in terms of Gini Index) prediction among the candidates, the "forecast combination puzzle" phenomenon disappears. The simple average method performs much worse than the more sophisticated model combination methods, indicating that combining different methods could help us avoid performance degradation. Second, the choice of the prediction accuracy measure is crucial in defining the best candidate prediction for "low frequency and high severity" (LFHS) data. For example, mean square error (MSE) does not distinguish well between model combination methods, as the values are close. Third, the performances of different model combination methods can differ drastically. We propose using a new model combination method, named ARM-Tweedie, for such LFHS data; it benefits from an optimal rate of convergence and exhibits a desirable performance in several measures for the Kangaroo data. Fourth, overall, model combination methods improve the prediction accuracy for auto insurance claim costs. In particular, Adaptive Regression by Mixing (ARM), ARM-Tweedie, and constrained Linear Regression can improve forecast performance when there are only weak learners or when no dominant learner exists.

stat.AP

Performance Assessment of High-dimensional Variable Identification

Since model selection is ubiquitous in data analysis, reproducibility of statistical results demands a serious evaluation of reliability of the employed model selection method, no matter what label it may have in terms of good properties. Instability measures have been proposed for evaluating model selection uncertainty. However, low instability does not necessarily indicate that the selected model is trustworthy, since low instability can also arise when a certain method tends to select an overly parsimonious model. F- and G-measures have become increasingly popular for assessing variable selection performance in theoretical studies and simulation results. However, they are not computable in practice. In this work, we propose an estimation method for F- and G-measures and prove their desirable properties of uniform consistency. This gives the data analyst a valuable tool to compare different variable selection methods based on the data at hand. Extensive simulations are conducted to show the very good finite sample performance of our approach. We further demonstrate the application of our methods using several micro-array gene expression data sets, with intriguing findings.

stat.ME