Tag Archives: actuaries

On my way to Tsinghua (清华大学), Beijing

Next week, I will be at Tsinghua University in Beijing. On Tuesday, in the early afternoon, I will give three lectures for undergraduate students on the theme: ‘Three lectures on AI and its implications for actuarial (and/or financial) professions.

These lectures explore the relationship between artificial intelligence and insurance. They begin from the observation that insurance has long relied on prediction, classification, and decision-making under uncertainty, well before the recent rise of AI. AI therefore does not introduce these issues from scratch, but changes their scale, granularity, and practical consequences. The lectures review the insurance foundations of pricing and pooling, then examine the main challenges raised by AI, including personalization, selection, causality, bias, fairness, governance, and trust. They finally turn to the concrete uses of AI across the insurance value chain, emphasizing that a good system should not be judged by accuracy alone, but also by its calibration, its fairness, and its ability to support real decisions in practice.

In the evening, I will give a talk at the seminar, at Renmin University of China, on the theme: ‘Using optimal transport to mitigate unfair predictions and quantify counterfactual fairness.’ The first part will revisit topics that I presented in greater detail in the lectures notes of my course this autumn at Kyoto University, particularly the price to be paid in terms of accuracy in order to achieve fairness. The second part will discuss the paper ‘Sequential Transport for Causal Mediation Analysis,’ which was posted online a few days ago.

On Wednesday, I will have in-depth academic exchange session with students from the Tsinghua Actuarial Science Association, at Tsinghua University.

Correlation, Causation, Circumstance, Context

This post was originally written and published in French, Corrélation et causalité, circonstance et contexte

Let’s imagine we collected a few pieces of information, for a clearly identified individuals, via connected devices,

  • Thursday 18:30: a €45 purchase at a bar-tabac
  • Friday 13:15, 1 hour above Porte Saint-Martin
  • Saturday 14:00, 1 hour near Place de la République

Trying to make the data “speak”, we might hesitate between a first version

  • Thursday 18:30: a €45 purchase of cigarettes
  • Friday 13:15, 1 hour at the mosque, at prayer time
  • Saturday 14:00, 1 hour in a demonstration that started from Place de la République in the early afternoon

and a second version

  • Thursday 18:30: a €45 purchase of tax stamps
  • Friday 13:15, 1 hour at the gym
  • Saturday 14:00, 1 hour at the hairdresser’s, Place de la République

In other words: with the very same raw signal, we can build two perfectly coherent stories. This is not an artistic trick à la Sophie Calle; it is the standard situation as soon as we work with traces (geolocation, timestamps, spending, calls, driving). Data do not necessarily lie. But they underdetermine the narrative, because they allow several possible worlds. In insurance (and more broadly in the economy of prediction), we are used to taking correlations and turning them into decisions—not only to “understand”, but to price, classify, accept, refuse. The point is not to say this is illegitimate in principle. The point is to recall what we do when we only correlate, and what we forget when we have no context.

Continue reading Correlation, Causation, Circumstance, Context