IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/metcap/v17y2015i2d10.1007_s11009-013-9371-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Error Rates and Improved Algorithms for Rare Event Simulation with Heavy Weibull Tails

Author

Listed:
  • Søren Asmussen

    (Aarhus University)

  • Dominik Kortschak

    (Université Lyon 1)

Abstract

Let Y 1,...,Y n be i.i.d. subexponential and S n = Y 1 + ⋯ + Y n . Asmussen and Kroese (Adv Appl Probab 38:545–558, 2006) suggested a simulation estimator for evaluating ${\mathbb P}(S_n>x)$ , combining an exchangeability argument with conditional Monte Carlo. The estimator was later shown by Hartinger and Kortschak (Bl DGVFM 30:363–377, 2009) to have vanishing relative error. For the Weibull and related cases, we calculate the exact error rate and suggest improved estimators. These improvements can be seen as control variate estimators, but are rather motivated by second order subexponential theory which is also at the core of the technical proofs.

Suggested Citation

  • Søren Asmussen & Dominik Kortschak, 2015. "Error Rates and Improved Algorithms for Rare Event Simulation with Heavy Weibull Tails," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 441-461, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:metcap:v:17:y:2015:i:2:d:10.1007_s11009-013-9371-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11009-013-9371-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11009-013-9371-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11009-013-9371-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Asmussen, S. & Binswanger, K., 1997. "Simulation of Ruin Probabilities for Subexponential Claims," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 297-318, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Søren Asmussen & Jaakko Lehtomaa, 2017. "Distinguishing Log-Concavity from Heavy Tails," Risks, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-14, February.
    2. O. J. Boxma & E. J. Cahen & D. Koops & M. Mandjes, 2019. "Linear Stochastic Fluid Networks: Rare-Event Simulation and Markov Modulation," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 125-153, March.
    3. Hansjörg Albrecher & Martin Bladt & Eleni Vatamidou, 2021. "Efficient Simulation of Ruin Probabilities When Claims are Mixtures of Heavy and Light Tails," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 1237-1255, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fabian Dickmann & Nikolaus Schweizer, 2014. "Faster Comparison of Stopping Times by Nested Conditional Monte Carlo," Papers 1402.0243, arXiv.org.
    2. Albrecher Hansjörg & Kantor Josef, 2002. "Simulation of ruin probabilities for risk processes of Markovian type," Monte Carlo Methods and Applications, De Gruyter, vol. 8(2), pages 111-128, December.
    3. Dassios, Angelos & Jang, Jiwook & Zhao, Hongbiao, 2015. "A risk model with renewal shot-noise Cox process," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 55-65.
    4. Sandeep Juneja, 2001. "Importance Sampling and the Cyclic Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 49(6), pages 900-912, December.
    5. Luis Rincón & David J. Santana, 2022. "Ruin Probability for Finite Erlang Mixture Claims Via Recurrence Sequences," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 2213-2236, September.
    6. Yuguang Fan & Philip S. Griffin & Ross Maller & Alexander Szimayer & Tiandong Wang, 2017. "The Effects of Largest Claim and Excess of Loss Reinsurance on a Company’s Ruin Time and Valuation," Risks, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-27, January.
    7. Martire, Antonio Luciano, 2022. "Volterra integral equations: An approach based on Lipschitz-continuity," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 435(C).
    8. Hélène Cossette & Etienne Marceau & Quang Huy Nguyen & Christian Y. Robert, 2019. "Tail Approximations for Sums of Dependent Regularly Varying Random Variables Under Archimedean Copula Models," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 461-490, June.
    9. Zdravko I. Botev & Robert Salomone & Daniel Mackinlay, 2019. "Fast and accurate computation of the distribution of sums of dependent log-normals," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 280(1), pages 19-46, September.
    10. Paulsen, Jostein & Kasozi, Juma & Steigen, Andreas, 2005. "A numerical method to find the probability of ultimate ruin in the classical risk model with stochastic return on investments," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-420, June.
    11. David J. Santana & Juan González-Hernández & Luis Rincón, 2017. "Approximation of the Ultimate Ruin Probability in the Classical Risk Model Using Erlang Mixtures," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 775-798, September.
    12. Tamturk, Muhsin & Utev, Sergey, 2018. "Ruin probability via Quantum Mechanics Approach," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 69-74.
    13. Karthyek R. A. Murthy & Sandeep Juneja & Jose Blanchet, 2012. "State-independent Importance Sampling for Random Walks with Regularly Varying Increments," Papers 1206.3390, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2014.
    14. Søren Asmussen & Reuven Y. Rubinstein, 1999. "Sensitivity Analysis of Insurance Risk Models via Simulation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(8), pages 1125-1141, August.
    15. Coulibaly, Ibrahim & Lefèvre, Claude, 2008. "On a simple quasi-Monte Carlo approach for classical ultimate ruin probabilities," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 935-942, June.
    16. Nam Kyoo Boots & Perwez Shahabuddin, 2001. "Simulating Tail Probabilities in GI/GI.1 Queues and Insurance Risk Processes with Subexponentail Distributions," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 01-012/4, Tinbergen Institute.
    17. Joshua Chan & Dirk Kroese, 2011. "Rare-event probability estimation with conditional Monte Carlo," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 189(1), pages 43-61, September.
    18. Dassios, Angelos & Jang, Jiwook & Zhao, Hongbiao, 2015. "A risk model with renewal shot-noise Cox process," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64051, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:metcap:v:17:y:2015:i:2:d:10.1007_s11009-013-9371-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.