Aug 2026· Journal of economics, finance and management studies· 0 citations
TL;DR
A SHAP-based governance framework for evaluating explainable machine learning in motor insurance pricing, with particular attention to ASOP 41 and ASOP 56, which demonstrates that SHAP can provide useful evidence for model understanding and actuarial communication, but cannot by itself establish compliance with ASOP 41 or ASOP 56.
Abstract
Machine learning models can improve insurance pricing accuracy but create challenges for actuarial transparency and model governance. This paper develops a SHAP-based governance framework for evaluating explainable machine learning in motor insurance pricing, with particular attention to ASOP 41 and ASOP 56. The framework is evaluated using the real freMTPL2freq portfolio of 677,991 French motor third-party-liability policies. A Poisson GLM and gradient-boosted Poisson model are compared using out-of-sample deviance, cross-validation, calibration, and Gini discrimination measures. The gradient-boosted model achieves a 2.2–2.4% reduction in Poisson deviance relative to the GLM and substantially higher risk-ranking discrimination (Gini 0.158 versus 0.089). SHAP analysis identifies bonus-malus level, driver age, and population density as important predictors and indicates an age-by-vehicle-power interaction. A geographic proxy-discrimination audit finds material variation in predicted risk across areas and regions, while residual association with population density is weak after controlling for conventional rating factors. The results demonstrate that SHAP can provide useful evidence for model understanding and actuarial communication, but cannot by itself establish compliance with ASOP 41 or ASOP 56. The proposed framework therefore integrates explainability with validation, calibration, stability, and fairness diagnostics to support broader actuarial model governance.
The findings indicate that interpretable machine learning can give lenders a defensible account of every credit decision — a capability that serves both regulatory oversight and the individuals whose applications are under review.
Kelvin Lin· Advances in Economics, Manag...· 0 citations
TaxMind is introduced, an interpretable risk management framework for predicting whether PIT obligations will progress to mandatory collection and for integrating debtor- and debt-related information into risk-based segmentation, supporting TaxMind as a model-agnostic early-warning framework for preventive tax debt man...
Malak Khreis, Hadia H. Harb, Soha Dia· Journal of Risk and Financia...· 0 citations
An adaptability–stability–interpretability framework for selecting bankruptcy prediction models under different institutional and market conditions is proposed and provides evidence that explainable ensemble and deep tabular models can recover economically meaningful distress signals across markets while differing in t...
A. Hussain, Jingchun Sun· Journal of Forecasting· 0 citations
The study contributes an auditor-oriented architecture that separates predictive screening from the professional conclusion, embeds explanation quality and calibration into model evaluation, and maps model outputs to review procedures, suitable for future validation on verified Indian firm-year enforcement, restatement...
Mohammed Abid, S. Kothari· International Journal For Mu...· 0 citations
AI-driven credit scoring is supervised as a high-risk application in banking and insurance, yet unfairness is rarely operationalized as a measurable category of model, conduct, legal, and reputational risk, so fairness-risk controls organized around impact assessment, independent validation, and three lines of defense...
Paulo Alcarva· Risks· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.