28.05.2013 Views

Etude des marchés d'assurance non-vie à l'aide d'équilibres de ...

Etude des marchés d'assurance non-vie à l'aide d'équilibres de ...

Etude des marchés d'assurance non-vie à l'aide d'équilibres de ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

tel-00703797, version 2 - 7 Jun 2012<br />

Chapitre 1. Sur la nécessité d’un modèle <strong>de</strong> marché<br />

Let us first regress the bronchitis indicator on all variables<br />

⎛ ⎞<br />

⎛ ⎞<br />

Y =<br />

⎜<br />

⎝<br />

B1<br />

.<br />

Bn<br />

⎟<br />

⎠ and X =<br />

⎜<br />

⎝.<br />

1 P1 C1<br />

.<br />

.<br />

1 Pn Cn<br />

with a logit link function. The regression summary is given below<br />

⎟<br />

⎠ ,<br />

Call: glm(formula = bron ~ 1 + cigs + poll, family = binomial)<br />

Deviance Residuals:<br />

Min 1Q Median 3Q Max<br />

-2.4023 -0.5606 -0.4260 -0.3155 2.3594<br />

Coefficients:<br />

Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)<br />

(Intercept) -10.08491 2.95100 -3.417 0.000632 ***<br />

cigs 0.21169 0.03813 5.552 2.83e-08 ***<br />

poll 0.13176 0.04895 2.692 0.007113 **<br />

---<br />

Signif. co<strong><strong>de</strong>s</strong>: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1<br />

Null <strong>de</strong>viance: 221.78 on 211 <strong>de</strong>grees of freedom<br />

Residual <strong>de</strong>viance: 174.21 on 209 <strong>de</strong>grees of freedom - AIC: 180.21<br />

So the GLM fit seems good because all variables (including intercept) are significant with<br />

a very low p-value. However the plot of residuals ∗ (see Figure 1.8a) against fitted values † is<br />

quite puzzling. Two distinct curves are shown: one for ill patients and the other for healthy<br />

ones.<br />

When categorizing the P variable, we lose information but we transform binary data into<br />

binomial data. This makes the fit better on this aspect, see Figure 1.8b. So for the same data,<br />

with the same (significant) variables, the two analyses of residuals lead to different conclusions.<br />

Hence, conclusions of residual analysis must be taken with great care.<br />

GLM outputs of Section 1.3.1<br />

See below the summary table with coefficients values, standard errors, z-statistics and pvalue.<br />

For confi<strong>de</strong>ntiality reason, all the <strong>de</strong>viance and AIC statistics shown in this paper have<br />

been scaled by the same positive coefficient.<br />

Here follows the regression summary when variables are categorical.<br />

Call: glm(formula = did_lapse ~ agepolgroup2 + priceratio:agegroup4 +<br />

priceratio * (gen<strong>de</strong>r + agevehgroup2 + prembeforegroup2),<br />

family = binomial(), data = workdata)<br />

Deviance Residuals:<br />

Min 1Q Median 3Q Max<br />

-3.1587 -0.6633 -0.6060 -0.5193 2.8747<br />

Coefficients:<br />

Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)<br />

(Intercept) -2.522477 0.120852 -20.873 < 2e-16 ***<br />

∗. Working residuals are ˆɛi = Yi − ˆπi. Note that using other residual types, Pearson, Stu<strong>de</strong>ntized, do not<br />

change this behavior.<br />

†. Fitted values are ˆπi.<br />

80

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!