Upload
salford-systems
View
1.196
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Combining Linear and Non-linear Modeling
TechniquesEMB America + Salford SystemsGetting the best of Two Worlds
Who is EMB?
Insurance industry predictive modeling applications
EMBLEM- our GLM tool
How we have used CART with EMBLEM
Case studies
Other areas of expected synergies
Outline
Global network of p&c insurance consultants servicing clients throughout the world
(insert globe)
EMB Worldwide
Predictive Modeling Ratemaking & Profitability Analysis Underwriting & Credit Scoring Enterprise Risk Management, Pro Forma, Business
Planning Retention & Conversion Modeling New Program Development Competitive Analysis Reinsurance Program Analysis Reserve Analysis & Opinion Letters Software Development & Software Support Expert Witness Testimony Regulatory Support & Law Analysis
Consulting Services Offered
EMB’s suite of software products cover all aspects of personal and commercial lines of insurance◦ EMBLEM◦ Rate Assessor◦ Classifier ◦ Igloo Professional◦ ExtrEMB◦ ResQ Professional ◦ PrisEMB◦ RePro
State-of-the-Art Software
We use EMBLEM, a GLM tool, for our predictive modeling needs
Why?
EMBLEM
Primary application:◦ Estimating the cost of the product they sell (insurance) two steps:
Reserving= estimating the cost of outstanding insurance claims Pricing= estimating the cost of future insurance coverage
Secondary applications◦ Retention Modeling= probability that a policyholder will renew
◦ Conversion Modeling= probability that a prospective policyholder will purchase a policy
◦ Price Optimization
◦ Claim fraud detection
◦ Marketing
Predictive Modeling in the Insurance Industry
Goal is to develop a unique rate for every risk◦ Don’t think in terms of good/bad risks
◦ State Farm/Allstate vs GEICO/Progressive
◦ Quickly exhausts the data Credibility/ variability/ stability
Risks are described by the predictor variables, not the target.◦ Need to have a mapping of the predictor variable levels to a target
value- not the other way around
Other way around makes it difficult to derive impact of individual predictor variables
Important because actual data often does not describe all possible combinations of potential customers
Estimating the Cost of Insurance
Highly regulated marketplace◦ Restrictions
Predictors can and cannot use Credit scores
Rules on values for the predictors Ages 65+ relativities cannot be >110% of ages 40-60 Maximum rate change between adjacent territories
Rules on predictor order and magnitude of importance CA Sequential Analysis (driving record>annual mileage>years held license)
◦ Regulatory Approval Rates need to be supported
Black box methodologies will not be accepted
Estimating the Cost of Insurance
Response variable is continuous/discrete function
(insert graph)◦ Gamma consistent with severity modeling, or even Inverse Gaussian
(insert graph)◦ Poisson consistent with frequency modeling
No single trial/outcome◦ Trial is measured in terms of time
◦ Actual policy length varies tremendously because of changes Marital status New car moved
Estimating the Cost of Insurance
In 1996, EMB designed EMBLEM to provide access to GLM for statisticians and non-statisticians pricing personal and commercial insurance
EMBLEM revolutionized the use of GLM’s, enabling analysis that was previously either impossible or too time-consuming to be worth attempting
EMBLEM is now used by over 100 insurance companies globally:◦ 18 of the top 20 personal auto writers in the UK◦ 50 companies in the US including 8 of the top 10 personal auto writers
Fastest GLM tool with the capability to model millions of observations in seconds with a host of diagnostic tools:◦ Graphical, practical, statistical, automated.
◦ Stand-alone software package that can be integrated with a variety of external software including SAS®
◦ Microsoft® Visual Basic® for Applications provides ultimate flexibility
Solution? EMBLEM
GLM characteristics work to our advantage◦ Exponential family does an excellent job of describing
the underlying components of insurance losses
◦ Output of the model is in the form of Beta parameters which can easily be converted to rate relativities
◦ EMBLEM is not automated User has complete control over the model structure
Complete diagnostic tools to assist the modeler with decisions
EMBLEM
In terms of estimating the cost of insurance:◦ UK has embraced predictive modeling
Experienced with its techniques
Knowledgeable with the factors that tend to be predictive
◦ US is learning about predictive modeling Saturation with big players in personal lines marketplace
Companies not using predictive modeling techniques are being adversely selected against
Now expanding dimensionality of databases
Still fairly new concept in commercial lines marketplace
Big players are using techniques but historical rating structures are hindering the rapid expansion
Current Status in Insurance Marketplace
Result?◦ UK is expanding into secondary applications
Retention modeling
Conversion modeling
Price optimization
Claim fraud detection
◦ Because Predictive Modeling has been around for some time in the UK, the datasets are getting larger in terms of the number of predictors to evaluate
◦ Experienced US companies are beginning to evaluate the secondary applications
◦ Marketing is used in a manner similar to other industries
Current Status in Insurance Marketplace
How does CART fit into this?◦ As we transition into the secondary applications we move from
modeling a continuous function to a binary function
Tree-based techniques can add value to the analysis
Retention and Conversion modeling◦ Accept/ Reject target variable
◦ Desirable smooth surface
◦ Price optimization integrates these with premium models
Marketing and Fraud detection ◦ Classic tree applications
CART
Using CART and EMBLEM◦ Goal is to play off of the strengths of each tool
CART strengths◦ Automatic separation of relevant from irrelevant predictors
◦ Easily rank-orders variable importance
◦ Automatic interaction detection (requires additional work)
◦ Captures multiple structures within a dataset rather than a single dominant structure
◦ Can handle missing values and is impervious to outliers
CART and EMBLEM
EMBLEM Strengths
◦ User has control over the model structure
◦ Ease of communication/conceptualization- effects of each explanatory variable is transparent
◦ Provides predicted response values for new data points
CART and EMBLEM
CART◦ Factor selection
◦ Interaction detection
◦ Model validation
EMBLEM◦ Model structure
◦ Incorporating time/seasonality trend effects
◦ Implementation of results
CART and EMBLEM
Both CART and EMBLEM are excellent tools both of which produce consistent results in similar situations
◦ This is not an exercise of seeing which is better
The purpose of this discussion is to show how efficiencies can be gained in the modeling process
◦ As datasets get larger in terms of the number of predictors time becomes a crucial element
Speakers Note
Retention modeling assignment
◦ 97,227 observations
Each observation represents one trial/outcome
Split 50/50 between training/test datasets
◦ 11 predictors
Grand total number of levels:147
Case Study #1- US Dataset
Modeling Process◦ Started with Forward Entry Regression
Automated process Used Chi-Squared statistic for testing significance Took about 30 minutes to run
◦ Significant factors (8)
Rating Area Vehicle Category Age NCD Driver Restriction Vehicle Age Change Over Last Year’s Premium Market Competitiveness
Case Study # 1
Build a model with no factors and add based on prespecified criteria regarding improvement in model fit:
(insert table)
Add the factor that performed the best on the Chi Square test. (Policyholder Age)
Iterate process with the new base model until no further factors indicated removal
Forward Entry Regression
Compared results with CART/ TreeNet
◦ Significant factors were essentially the same
◦ Model predictiveness was the same (ROC=0.7)
Interactions
◦ No significant interactions were found by EMBLEM or CART
Test Dataset
◦ ROC=0.7
Case Study #1
Retention modeling assignment
◦ 198,386 observations
Each observation represented one trial/outcome
Split 50/50 between training/test datasets
◦ 135 predictors
Grand total number of levels: approx 3,752
Case Study #2- UK Dataset
Forward Entry Regression◦ Found 57 predictors to be significant
◦ Took a weekend to run
Comparison to CART/ TreeNet◦ Found 24 significant predictors
◦ Top 15 based on variable importance were also found by EMBLEM
◦ Correlations with the rest of the predictors
Through the modeling process we reduced the number of predictors to 26
Case Study #2
Interactions
◦ We relied on indications from CART/ TreeNet
◦ 6 interactions were identified and included in the model
EMBLEM Results
◦ Training ROC= .862
◦ Test ROC= .85
Case Study #2
Variable importance
Segmentation
Super-Profiling
Other Expected Synergies
CART excels at identifying different segments in data
CART may also help determine where to segment data
Segmentation is a useful alternative to fitting many interactions
◦ Example: In a automobile insurance renewal problem, a CART analysis showed several occurrences of a split between those policyholders with just one years duration and those with a greater duration
This suggests segmenting the data into two parts:◦ Policies renewing with one year duration
◦ Policies renewing with more than one year
Segmentation
After a GLM model is constructed use CART to model the residuals to see if any patterns exists
◦ If a pattern is discovered, go back to the model structure and incorporate the findings
◦ Test to see if model structure was inadvertently over-simplified
Super-Profiling