Large Sample Tests and Confidence Intervals for Mortality Rates
死亡率的大样本检验与置信区间AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要讨论保险死亡率的抽样推断,未涉及所列金融风险或其他细分方向的明确内容。
反馈分类问题死亡率的大样本检验与置信区间AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
In computing mortality rates from insurance data, the unit of measurement used is frequently based on number of policies or amount of insurance rather than on lives. Then the death of one person may result in several units of “death” with respect to the investigation; moreover, the number of units per individual may vary noticeably. Thus the usual large sample methods of obtaining significance tests and confidence intervals for the true value of the mortality rate are not applicable to these situations. If the number of units associated with each person in the investigation were known, accurate large sample results could be obtained; however, determination of the number of units associated with each individual would require an extremely large amount of work. This article presents some valid large sample tests and confidence intervals for the mortality rate which do not require much work and are reasonably efficient. More general situations are also considered.