Actuarial Reasoning Tasks

This manuscript formalizes the most popular model validation tools used in general insurance actuarial modeling. These include graphical tools like calibration plots, actual-vs-expected plots, lift charts, Murphy diagrams, as well as classical statistical tools such as Bregman losses, deviance losses, elementary losses, Murphy's decomposition and Gini scores. Particular emphasis is placed on whether calibration and discrimination are studied under a policy-weighted or an exposure-weighted population measure. This distinction is crucial in ensuring that premium schemes are calibrated on the correct scale.

Scaling laws in modern deep learning describe how held-out loss improves as model capacity, training data, and compute increase, often following power-law trends. We investigate whether analogous scaling regularities arise in actuarial ratemaking, where data are tabular, heterogeneous, and noisy, and where classical models such as GLMs remain strong baselines. Using a real-world motor insurance portfolio, we train models from different families across increasing fractions of the training data and multiple random seeds, evaluating out-of-sample Poisson deviance, a likelihood-based loss for Poisson count predictions in which lower values indicate better held-out fit. We find that all model families improve with additional data, but scaling exponents differ substantially: TabM exhibits markedly stronger data scaling than purely supervised tabular Transformers and standard MLP baselines. Transformer variants show weak parameter scaling unless augmented with additional inductive biases (TabM-style adaptation or self-supervision). These results provide quantitative guidance on model selection by data regime and suggest that effective scaling on actuarial tabular tasks depends on architecture and loss function objective design, with simple increases in Transformer size providing limited gains.

This paper investigates how multi-agent systems (MAS)-based on large language models (LLMs) can support actuarial risk modelling, with a particular focus on uncertainty quantification. Actuarial workflows represent a high-stakes decision-support setting where unreliable outputs may lead to incorrect risk assessment, unfair pricing, and regulatory non-compliance. To address uncertainty introduced by the probabilistic nature of LLMs and dependencies between agents, a multi-agent framework is proposed in which specialised agents perform data preparation, modelling, review, and explanation tasks under a central hub. The main contribution is a novel approach to uncertainty propagation using token-level log-probabilities and a Bayesian Network. Importantly, log probabilities are not treated as direct probabilities of correctness or task success. Instead, length-normalised log-probability summaries are transformed into calibrated task-level confidence estimates before incorporation into the Bayesian Network. Results show that the framework reproduces baseline actuarial performance while providing additional insight into workflow stability and runtime uncertainty propagation.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown strong potential in financial reasoning, but existing benchmarks often evaluate domain knowledge, numerical reasoning, long-context understanding, and tool use in separate settings. This limits their ability to assess realistic professional workflows that require auditable, context-grounded, and tool-executable decisions. We introduce \textbf{INS-ActBench}, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating professional actuarial capability in LLMs. INS-ActBench contains 12,050 Q&A pairs from public exams and sample questions released by 16 actuarial associations. It covers three subsets: \textbf{INS-Act-Know} for standardized actuarial knowledge, \textbf{INS-Act-Case} for long-context insurance case reasoning, and \textbf{INS-Act-Practice} for spreadsheet and R-code tasks with verifiable numerical outputs. Experiments on nine representative LLMs and human actuarial experts reveal a clear capability boundary: frontier LLMs perform strongly on standardized knowledge, but remain much weaker in case reasoning, tool-based workflows, and jurisdiction-sensitive practice. INS-ActBench provides a reproducible foundation for developing actuarial LLMs toward reliable professional assistance. The code is available at https://github.com/FDU-INS/INS-ActBench.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is beginning to reshape actuarial practice, particularly in domains that require reasoning over unstructured documents, heterogeneous data sources, and regulated decision workflows. Actuaries now face a design space that ranges from traditional rule-based automation to large language models (LLMs), retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), and multi-agent agentic'' systems that plan, retrieve, call tools, and reflect. This paper examines how these emerging architectures can support actuarial priorities such as transparency, auditability, and human-in-the-loop governance, with a focus on straight-through decision processes. To make these ideas concrete, we develop and analyze an agentic AI framework for straight-through underwriting of small commercial Business Owner Policies (BOPs). We construct a synthetic but realistic experimental environment and compare three underwriting pipelines: (i) a single-LLM baseline, (ii) a naive RAG system, and (iii) a multi-agent Agentic RAG'' pipeline that combines targeted retrieval, third-party data checks, and explicit multi-step rule evaluation. The agentic system performs best overall, with the largest gains in multi-step and missing-information scenarios, where structured retrieval and reflection help the model avoid unsupported straight-through decisions.

Automated Driving System deployments create a foundational ratemaking challenge: sparse experience, shifting operational design domains, and non-stationary risk across software releases. We propose a hierarchical Bayesian credibility framework pooling across cities, software versions, and territories via a learned ODD-similarity kernel, nesting Buhlmann-Straub as a limiting case. Demonstrated on 648 verified-engaged Waymo crashes across four U.S. metros from the NHTSA Standing General Order database against 116 million matched miles, city-aggregate credibility weights are moderate (0.12-0.46), partial pooling decisively outperforms no pooling, and a power analysis shows the learned kernel's advantage becomes detectable at approximately twelve deployed cities.

Paper A defines a time-consistent actuarial runtime that prices each side-effect-bearing action against a contractually fixed safe default and gates execution against a reserve budget. It treats the operator as passive. This paper makes the operator strategic. We characterise a five-attack space for autonomous AI-agent insurance contracts and prove when the actuarial runtime is gaming-resistant. Two attack surfaces -- post-toll safe-default selection and within-boundary action splitting -- are closed by Paper A's minimal-authority and no-splitting clauses. The remaining three require new contract clauses. First, common-control aggregation prevents cross-boundary re-routing from reducing toll below the boundary potential applied to total exposure. Second, interface failures such as invalid JSON are contract-relevant events, not safety wins: treating them as zero-toll safe defaults can reward unreliable models, while escalation fees reverse the incentive. We validate this interface-compliance theorem on committed cross-model traces from the companion empirical paper. Third, a model-identity menu with a componentwise-minimum penalty schedule makes truthful reporting of the deployed model weakly dominant. We then compose these clauses with Paper A's runtime guarantees to obtain joint incentive compatibility over the five-attack space. Finally, a two-parameter premium family discharges operator individual rationality and weak budget balance at the truthful equilibrium. The result is an incentive-compatibility layer for actuarial control of autonomous-agent side effects.

Accurate estimation of long-term care transition probabilities is central to disability insurance pricing, reserving, and solvency assessment. Classical actuarial multi-state models commonly rely on Markov, semi-Markov, or proportional-hazard specifications, which provide a direct connection to cohort projection but may be restrictive for irregular longitudinal health data with nonlinear aging patterns and heterogeneous covariate histories. This paper develops a well-calibrated estimator of multi-state transition probabilities for irregular longitudinal health data. The model learns from individual health history, incorporates the time elapsed between observations, and conditions transition probabilities on demographic and socioeconomic attributes. It produces a valid probability distribution over the next observed health state, with four possible states: healthy, mild disability, severe disability, and death. Individual probabilities are aggregated by age group and origin state to form transition matrices compatible with actuarial cohort projection. Using longitudinal data from the Health and Retirement Study, we compare the proposed estimator with logistic regression, gradient-boosted trees, a recurrent neural network, and a last-state persistence benchmark. The evaluation considers probabilistic accuracy, endpoint discrimination and calibration for severe disability and death, risk concentration, and transition matrix error after aggregation. The proposed estimator improves severe disability discrimination relative to logistic regression and gradient-boosted tree benchmarks, maintains strong calibration, and yields the lowest transition matrix error among the evaluated models in the held-out test analysis. Results show that a structured machine learning estimator can support long-term care transition modeling when judged by calibration and projection fidelity, beyond discrimination.

Mortality forecasting plays an important role in actuarial and policy decision-making, but its implementation remains technically complex and inaccessible to non-expert users. This project proposes a reliable large language model (LLM)-integrated interface that improves usability while maintaining statistical power. The LLM is designed as a constrained orchestration layer that translates natural-language inputs into structured configurations for a deterministic forecasting pipeline. A three-phase methodology is employed to ensure accuracy, usability, and transparency. First, a baseline pipeline is implemented using the CoMoMo package, reproducing established mortality forecasting results. Second, the pipeline is extended to generate multi-step forecasts using rolling-origin evaluation and mean squared error (MSE). Third, a prototype interface uses a local LLM to handle users' forecasting requests in plain language. The system demonstrates that LLMs can enhance accessibility without compromising reproducibility, transparency, or actuarial validity in high-stakes analytical workflows.

We propose a foundational runtime actuarial layer for autonomous AI agents in which every side-effect-bearing action carries a time-consistent, counterfactual risk toll computed against a contractually fixed safe default, inside an explicit underwriting boundary. The framework treats per-action insurance as the primary unit of analysis and replaces post-hoc annual liability cover with a pre-action transaction layer. The paper establishes four structural results: (i) a well-defined counterfactual toll under a chosen safe-default mapping and continuation policy, with explicit non-uniqueness; (ii) a no-splitting property within an underwriting boundary that telescopes path-decomposed actions into a boundary potential, with a corollary tying gaming-resistance to boundary design; (iii) an irreversible-authority premium, split into a strictly positive action-level component and an if-and-only-if characterisation of the set-level robust capital increase; and (iv) a conservative runtime gating theorem that translates high-probability toll envelopes into an executed-action budget guarantee. The result is the mathematical base layer for a broader program: an empirical companion instantiates the runtime through an Actuarial Action Interface and authority-frontier experiments; a mechanism-design companion studies strategic operator incentives and cross-boundary aggregation; and a dynamic-underwriting companion studies experience rating and audit-replay calibration. The present paper states the primitive contract, the toll identity, the within-boundary no-arbitrage result, and the budget guarantee on which those later layers depend.

Autonomous AI agents increasingly issue side-effect-bearing actions: database mutations, refunds, payments, external commitments. We propose the Actuarial Action Interface (AAI), a deterministic runtime contract that prices each such action against a contractually fixed safe default under a time-consistent risk mapping, and gates execution against a per-boundary reserve capital budget. We then develop the Authority Frontier, an evaluation primitive measuring how much autonomous authority the runtime releases at each level of reserve capital. The framework provides (i) a deterministic quote-bind-commit protocol with toll-bounded capability tokens; (ii) a universal seven-class action taxonomy mapping heterogeneous tool calls to comparable authority units; (iii) replay determinism and pathwise reserve coverage under alpha-spending; (iv) cross-domain normalization via full reserve demand C_full and capital metrics Capital@k. We instantiate AAI across four agentic environments (database mutation, customer-service refund, and the public tau-bench retail and airline tool-use traces) and report a live Postgres panel in which three Azure-hosted models propose actions through the same contract. The frontier exhibits a common low-reserve refusal and intermediate-release pattern across domains, with saturation only where the budget grid reaches full reserve demand; required reserve capital varies by 22x (Capital@50 from 289 to 6457). The framework does not force domains into the same shape; it surfaces each domain's actuarial geometry. In the live panel the contract prevents realized loss across all three models at low budget while differing in underwriting persistence under denial: model identity is an actuarial underwriting variable. The contribution is a benchmark-ready evaluation framework for runtime actuarial control of autonomous-agent side effects.

Traditional multi-population models, such as the Li-Lee framework, rely on the assumption of mean-reverting country-specific deviations. However, recent data from high-longevity clusters suggest a systemic break in this paradigm. We identify a stationarity paradox where mortality residuals in countries like Sweden and West Germany exhibit persistent unit roots, leading to a systematic mispricing of longevity risk in linear models. To address these non-linearities, we propose Hybrid-Lift, a neural-actuarial framework that combines Hierarchical LSTM networks with a Mean-Bias Correction (MBC) anchoring mechanism. Positioned as a governance-friendly model challenger rather than a replacement of classical approaches, the framework exhibits selective superiority on out-of-sample validation (2012-2020): it outperforms Li-Lee by 17.40% in Sweden and 12.57% in West Germany, while remaining comparable for near-linear regimes such as Switzerland and Japan. We complement the predictive model with an integrated governance suite comprising SHAP-based cross-country influence mapping, a dual uncertainty framework for regulatory capital calibration (Swiss ES 99.0% of +1.153 years), and a reverse stress test identifying the critical shock threshold for solvency buffer exhaustion. This research provides evidence that neural networks, when properly anchored by actuarial principles, can serve as effective model challengers for longevity risk management under the SST and Solvency II standards.

We present ActuBench, a multi-agent LLM pipeline for the automated generation and evaluation of advanced actuarial assessment items aligned with the International Actuarial Association (IAA) Education Syllabus. The pipeline separates four LLM roles by adapter: one agent drafts items, one constructs distractors, a third independently verifies both stages and drives bounded one-shot repair loops, and a cost-optimized auxiliary agent handles Wikipedia-note summarization and topic labelling. The items, per-model responses and complete leaderboard are published as a browsable web interface at https://actubench.de/en/, allowing readers and practitioners to inspect individual items without a repository checkout. We evaluate 50 language models from eight providers on two complementary benchmarks -- 100 empirically hardest multiple-choice items and 100 open-ended items scored by an LLM judge -- and report three headline findings. First, multi-agent verification is load-bearing: the independent verifier flags a majority of drafted items on first pass, most of which the one-shot repair loop resolves. Second, locally-hosted open-weights inference sits on the cost-performance Pareto front: a Gemma~4 model running on consumer hardware and a Cerebras-hosted 120B open-weights model dominate the near-zero-cost region, with the latter within one item of the top of the leaderboard. Third, MCQ and LLM-as-Judge rankings differ meaningfully: the MCQ scaffold inflates the performance ceiling, and Judge-mode evaluation is needed to discriminate at the frontier.