Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T07:25:31.599Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some Comments on the Sparre Andersen Model in the Risk Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 August 2014

Olof Thorin
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The Sparre Andersen model assumes that the interclaim times and the amounts of claims are independent random variables, the former identically distributed according to a distribution function K(t), t ≥ o, K(o) = o, the latter identically distributed according to a distribution function P(y) — ∞ < y < ∞ As is well known, the Poisson risk process corresponds to the particular case K(t) = 1 — eβt. In the present paper it is pointed out that another particular case, viz. K(t) = є(t — h), corresponding to a fixed (and thus — strictly speaking—nonrandom) mterclaim time, h, has interesting applications. Thus, the ruin problem considered by Giezendanner, Straub and Wettenschwiler in a paper to the 1972 International Congress of Actuaries in Oslo can be formulated by means of this particular case. The same can be said about the earlier model brought forward by Ammeter in his 1948 paper in Skandinavisk Aktuarietidskrift.

About the contents of the paper the following further information may be given. The general Sparre Andersen model is first presented and then the ruin formulas are given for the case with a positive gross risk premium. Thereafter, a modified and more direct method for deriving certain necessary auxiliary functions is illustrated by examples including 1 a the Giezendanner—Straub—Wettenschwiler model. The rest of the paper contains a discussion from the point of view of the Sparre Andersen model of (1) the discrete (equidistant) inspection of a Poisson process for ruin, (11) the Ammeter model and analogous models, and (111) the Giezendanner—Straub—Wettenschwiler model.

Type
Research Article
Information
ASTIN Bulletin: The Journal of the IAA , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , September 1974 , pp. 104 - 125
Copyright
Copyright © International Actuarial Association 1974

References

[1]Ammeter, H 1948 A generalization of the collective theory of risk in regard to fluctuating basic-probabilities Skand AktuarTidskr, XXXI 171–198Google Scholar
[2]Andersen, E Sparre 1957 On the collective theory of risk in case of contagion between the claimsTransactions XVth International Congress of Actuaries, New York, II, 219–229Google Scholar
[3]Brans, J P 1966 67 Le problème de la ruine en theorie collective du risque Cas non markovien Cahiers du Centre d'Études de Recherche Opérationelle Bruxelles, 8, 159–178, 9, 5-31 117-122Google Scholar
[4]Buhlmann, H 1970 Mathematical Methods in Risk Theory, SpringerGoogle Scholar
[5]Cramér, H 1955 Collective risk theoryJubilee volume of Forsakringsaktiebolaget SkandiaGoogle Scholar
[6]Dreze, J -P 1968 Problème de la ruine en theorie collective du risque I, II Cahiers du Centre d'Études de Recherche Opérationelle, Bruxelles, 10, 127–173, 227–246Google Scholar
[7]Giezendanner, E, Straub, E and Wettenschwiler, K 1972 Zur Berechnung von RuinwahrscheinlichkeitenTransactions 19th International Congress of Actuaries, Oslo, II, 645–651Google Scholar
[8]Segerdahl, C O 1970 Stochastic processes and practical working models or Why is the Polya process approach defective in modern practice and how cope with its deficiencies Skand AktuarTidskr, LIII, 146–166Google Scholar
[9]Takács, L 1970 On risk reserve processes Skand AktuarTidskr, LIII, 64–75Google Scholar
[10]Thorin, O 1968 An identity in the collective risk theory with some applications Skand AktuarTidskr LI, 26–44Google Scholar
[11]Thorin, O 1970 Some remarks on the ruin problem in case the epochs of claims form a renewal process Skand AktuarTidskr LIII, 29–50Google Scholar
[12]Thorin, O 1971 Further remarks on the ruin problem in case the epochs of claims form a renewal process Skand AktuarTidskr, LIV, 14–38, 121–142Google Scholar
[13]Thorin, O 1971 Analytical steps towards a numerical calculation of the ruin probability for a finite period when the riskprocess is of the Poisson type or of the more general type studied by Sparre Andersen Astin Bulletin, VI, 54–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Thorin, O 1971 An outline of a generalization—started by E Sparre Andersen—of the classical ruin theory Astin Bulletin VI 108–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Thorin, O and Wikstad, N 1973 Numerical evaluation of ruin probabilities for a finite period Seminar presentation at the 19th International Congress of Actuaries Oslo 1972 Astin Bulletin, VII 137–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16]Thyrion, P 1969 Extension of the collective risk theory The Filip Lundberg Symposium Supplement to Skand AktuarTidskr LII, 84–98Google Scholar