2018
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3303296
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An Investigation of Machine Learning Approaches in the Solvency II Valuation Framework

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Conceivable alternatives to the entire adaptive algorithm are other typical machine learning techniques such as artificial neural networks (ANNs), decision tree learning or support vector machines. In particular, the classical feed forward networks proposed by Hejazi and Jackson (2017) and applied in various ways by Kopczyk (2018), Castellani et al (2018), Born (2018) and Schelthoff (2019) were shown to capture the complex nature of CFP models well. A major challenge here is not only to find reliable hyperparameters such as the numbers of hidden layers and nodes in the network, batch size, weight initializer probability distribution, learning rate or activation functions but also the high dependence on the random seeds.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Conceivable alternatives to the entire adaptive algorithm are other typical machine learning techniques such as artificial neural networks (ANNs), decision tree learning or support vector machines. In particular, the classical feed forward networks proposed by Hejazi and Jackson (2017) and applied in various ways by Kopczyk (2018), Castellani et al (2018), Born (2018) and Schelthoff (2019) were shown to capture the complex nature of CFP models well. A major challenge here is not only to find reliable hyperparameters such as the numbers of hidden layers and nodes in the network, batch size, weight initializer probability distribution, learning rate or activation functions but also the high dependence on the random seeds.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The gradient boosting machines, requiring more parameter tuning and thus being more versatile and demanding, came overall very close to the adaptive approaches. Castellani et al (2018) compared support vector regression (SVR) by Drucker et al (1997) to ANNs and the adaptive approaches by Teuguia et al (2014) in a seven risk factor example and found the performance of SVR placed somewhere inbetween the other two approaches with the ANNs getting closest to the nested simulations benchmark. As some further non-parametric approaches, Sell (2019) tested least-squares support-vector machines (LS-SVM) by Suykens and Vandewalle (1999) and shrunk additive least-squares approximations (SALSA) by Kandasamy and Yu (2016) in comparison to ANNs and the adaptive approaches by Krah et al (2018) with OLS regression.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, we try different regularization techniques and test the adequacy of the neural network approximations using the defining property of the conditional expectation. Neural networks have also been used for the calculation of solvency capital requirements by Hejazi and Jackson (2017), Fiore et al (2018) and Castellani et al (2019). But they all exclusively focus on value-at-risk, do not make use of importance sampling and apply neural networks in a slightly different way.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(2016) and Castellani et al . (2018). The former presents a regress-later model based on an orthogonal basis of piece-wise linear functions, and the latter a regress-now model based on neural networks.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%