Hierarchical Archimedean copulas through multivariate compound
distributions

© All Rights Reserved

4 views

Hierarchical Archimedean copulas through multivariate compound
distributions

© All Rights Reserved

- Worksheet Binomial Distribution Problems
- Literature Review Foriegn Exchange
- Unit-1A-pqt
- UT Dallas Syllabus for te3341.521.07u taught by Hlaing Minn (hxm025000)
- Game Theory Lecture Notes
- Discrete Particle Size Distribution May 2011
- UT Dallas Syllabus for stat5351.501 05f taught by Yuly Koshevnik (yxk055000)
- Http Myservices.relianceada.com BillSummaryPDFDetails.do List=1 500000959445 14 Aug 2010 443
- Probability I 2014
- Pnetwork
- New Microsoft Excel Worksheet
- Industrial Course Syllabi
- Fast Remote but Not Extreme Quantiles With Multiple Factors Applications to Solvency II and Enterprise Risk Management
- Mine 395 Notes
- Probability Distributionsa
- QMDM_Prob
- Schinner-2007-The Voynich Manuscript Evidence of the Hoax Hypothesis-000
- chap3.pdf
- Copula Regression
- Joint Probability Functions

You are on page 1of 13

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ime

distributions

Hlne Cossette, Simon-Pierre Gadoury, tienne Marceau *, Itre Mtalai

cole dactuariat, Universit Laval, Quebec (Qc), Canada

article info a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this paper, we propose a new hierarchical Archimedean copula construction based on multivariate

Received November 2016 compound distributions. This new imbrication technique is derived via the construction of a multivariate

Received in revised form June 2017 exponential mixture distribution through compounding. The absence of nesting and marginal conditions,

Accepted 6 June 2017

contrarily to the nested Archimedean copulas approach, leads to major advantages, such as a flexible

Available online 19 June 2017

range of possible combinations in the choice of distributions, the existence of explicit formulas for the

distribution of the sum, and computational ease in high dimensions. A balance between flexibility and

Keywords:

Archimedean copulas parsimony is targeted. After presenting the construction technique, properties of the proposed copulas

Mixing random variables are investigated and illustrative examples are given. A detailed comparison with other construction

Compounding methodologies of hierarchical Archimedean copulas is provided. Risk aggregation under this newly

MarshallOlkin proposed dependence structure is also examined.

Hierarchical structure 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

can be restrictive due to their exchangeability property. One can

Copulas are now well known tools used for dependence model- resort to another interesting class of copulas, namely vine copulas

ing purposes in many research topics. A d-dimensional copula is a (see e.g. Bedford and Cooke (2002) and Joe (1997)). They are

d-variate probability distribution function for which the marginals pair copula constructions allowing a cascade decomposition of a

are uniformly distributed on (0, 1), with d 2. One important multivariate distribution into the product of bivariate copulas. Vine

class of copulas is the Archimedean copula family, popular for its d(d1)

copulas force the use of 2 bivariate copulas which requires a

simple construction procedure and multivariate generalization. A

high number of parameters when d, the dimension of the copula,

d-dimensional copula C is said to be an Archimedean copula if

increases.

C (u1 , . . . , ud ) = 1 (u1 ) + + 1 (ud ) , Hierarchical Archimedean copulas provide an interesting al-

( )

ternative to allow asymmetries. The first approach to construct

for (u1 , . . . , ud ) [0, 1]d . (1) hierarchical Archimedean copulas was proposed by Joe (1997) who

The continuous and strictly decreasing function is called the introduced the so-called nested Archimedean copulas in three and

generator of the copula, where : [0, ) [0, 1], (0) = 1 and four dimensions. They are obtained by nesting into each other

limt (t) = 0. In the same manner, 1 : [0, 1] [0, ), for Archimedean copulas. They are able to capture different depen-

which 1 (0) = inf{t : (t) = 0}, where 1 is the inverse of the dence relations between and within different groups of risks with

generator . The set of all such functions is denoted by . In fact, a relatively small number of parameters (see e.g. Grecki et al.,

from Kimberlings and Bernsteins theorems, see e.g. Kimberling 2016a). They were further studied by e.g. McNeil (2008), Hofert

(1974), Feller (1971), and Hofert (2010), representation (1) leads to (2012), and Hofert (2011), in a general setting. For an Archimedean

a proper copula for all d 2 if and only if is the LaplaceStieltjes hierarchical structure to be a proper copula, a given nesting condi-

Transform (LST) of a strictly positive random variable (rv) with

tion must be verified. For example, a 3-dimensional fully nested

cumulative distribution function (cdf) F , where the LST of the rv

Archimedean copula can be written as

is given by

C (u1 , u2 , u3 ) = C (u1 , C (u2 , u3 ))

et x dF (x) = E et .

[ ]

L (t) = (2) ( ))

= 0 01 (u1 ) + 01 1 11 (u2 ) + 11 (u3 ) .

(

0

* Corresponding author.

E-mail address: etienne.marceau@act.ulaval.ca (. Marceau). must have completely monotone derivatives, where 0 and 1 are

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.insmatheco.2017.06.001

0167-6687/ 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

2 H. Cossette et al. / Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 76 (2017) 113

generators of the parent and the child copulas respectively. If gen- and marginal pgfs given by

erators 0 and 1 belong to the same family, the verification of this [

Mi

]

sufficient nesting condition can be done without much problem, PMi (t) = E ti , (i = 1, . . . , d), (4)

see Hofert (2010) for restrictions on the parameters. However,

if generators 0 and 1 of different Archimedean families are where |t1 |, . . . , |td | 1.

A vector of rvs = (1 , . . . , d ) is said to follow a multivariate

combined, the sufficient condition may not hold for any choice of

parameters. Also, sampling from these copulas can be difficult.

compound distribution if each Mi component i can be represented as

To circumvent these constraints, other approaches were pro- a random sum i.e. i = j=1 Bi, j , where i = 1, . . . , d for d 2.

posed to build hierarchical Archimedean copulas. Hering et al. For each i, the elements of the sequence Bi = {Bi,j , j = 1, 2, . . .}

(2010) suggest to build hierarchical Archimedean copulas based are assumed independent and identically distributed (iid) strictly

on Lvy subordinators. Also, Brechmann (2014) used the Kendall positive rvs, while the sequences are independent from each other

and from the vector of rvs M. By convention, for each i = 1, . . . , d,

distribution function, the multivariate analog to the probability

Bi,j Bi with cdf FBi and LST LBi (j = 1, 2, . . .).

integral transform for univariate random variables, as a tool to

Since the rv i is defined as a random sum, its LST is given by

construct hierarchical Archimedean copulas.

[ [ ]M ]

In this paper, our objective is to propose an alternative ap-

Li (t ) = E et i = EMi E et i |Mi = EMi E etBi i

[ ] [ [ ]]

proach to build hierarchical Archimedean copulas via multivari-

= PMi LBi (t ) ,

( )

ate compound distributions. The absence of nesting and marginal (5)

conditions leads to major advantages, such as a flexible range of

possible combinations in the choice of distributions, the existence for i = 1, . . . , d.

Similarly, the multivariate LST of the vector of mixing rvs is

of explicit formulas for the distribution of the sum, and compu-

given by

tational ease in high dimensions. The approach given here has

similarities with the one of Hering et al. (2010). Both approaches

L (t1 , . . . , td ) = E et1 1 . . . etd d

[ ]

derive hierarchical Archimedean copulas from the joint survival

= EM E et1 1 . . . etd d M

[ [ ]]

function of a multivariate mixed exponential distribution. Also,

sampling algorithms are obtained in a similar fashion. The proba- = EM [(E [etB1 ]M1 ) . . . (E [etBd ]Md )]. (6)

bilistic arguments at the basis of these two construction strategies

however differ. Here, random sums are key elements compared to With (6) and (3), the expression for the multivariate LST of is

Lvy processes in Hering et al. (2010). In our opinion, the proposed given by

approach uses simpler mathematical tools to obtain hierarchical

L (t1 , . . . , td ) = PM LB1 (t1 ) . . . LBd (td ) .

( )

Archimedean copulas. We provide in Section 4.2 a detailed com- (7)

parison of both constructions. In this paper, we consider the specific case of multivariate

The following sections are organized as follows: in Section 2, compound distribution for assuming that Mi = M (i = 1, . . . , d),

we provide the steps for the construction of a multivariate copula where M is a strictly positive discrete rv with

with the use of multivariate compound distributions, followed

PM (t) = E t M .

[ ]

by sampling algorithms, accompanied by relevant notations and (8)

properties. Section 3 proposes a representation of the copula by

In other words, the components of M are comonotonic and

common mixtures. In Section 4, we compare the proposed ap-

identically distributed (with Mi M, i = 1, . . . , d). Then, it means

proach with nested Archimedean copulas and Hering et al. (2010)s

that the vector of mixing rvs follows a multivariate compound

construction method and provide a brief discussion on estimation

distribution and its multivariate LST in (7) becomes

procedures. Finally, Section 5 is devoted to risk aggregation.

L (t1 , . . . , td ) = E et1 1 . . . etd d

[ ]

2. Construction of hierarchical Archimedean copulas with mul-

= EM E et1 1 . . . etd d |M

[ [ ]]

tivariate compound distributions

= EM E et1 1 |M . . . E etd d |M

[ [ ] [ ]]

As explained in Marshall and Olkin (1988), multivariate distri- [( [ ])M ]

= EM E et1 B1 . . . E etd Bd .

] [

butions can easily be constructed through the use of exponential (9)

mixtures. In this section, we propose an alternative method based

Combining (9) and (8) leads to the following expression for the

on a probabilistic argument framework using multivariate com-

multivariate LST of :

pound distributions to build hierarchical Archimedean copulas.

Note that the copula obtained under the proposed approach is

L (t1 , . . . , td ) = PM LB1 (t1 ) . . . LBd (td ) .

( )

(10)

represented as a specific function of LSTs of rvs and their inverse.

To obtain this representation, we have recourse to rvs with mul- Also, for each i = 1, . . . , d, (5) becomes

tivariate compound distributions. For this reason and given the

Li (t ) = PM LBi (t ) .

( )

context, we will refer either directly to LSTs or to the rvs associated (11)

to them. The key element of our construction is that the latter are

defined with a vector of mixing rvs, denoted by , which follows 2.2. Multivariate mixed exponential distributions defined with multi-

a multivariate compound distribution. We examine the properties variate compound distributions

of this new copula and provide simulation algorithms.

Let Y = (Y1,1 , . . . , Y1,n1 , . . . , Yd,1 , . . . , Yd,nd ) be a vector of

2.1. Multivariate compound distributions n1 + ( + nd rvs which can be more conveniently represented

as Y = Y1 , . . . , Yd , where Yi = Yi,1 , . . . , Y1,ni is the vector of

) ( )

Let M = (M1 , . . . , Md ) be a vector of discrete strictly positive ni rvs for the subgroup i (i = 1, 2, . . . , d). Given = , where

rvs with joint multivariate probability generating function (pgf) = (1 , . . . , d ), it is assumed that

given by

[ ] (Y1,1 | = ), . . . , (Y1,n1 | = ), . . . ,

M Md

PM (t1 , . . . , td ) = E t1 1 . . . td , (3) (Yd,1 | = ), . . . , (Yd,nd | = )

H. Cossette et al. / Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 76 (2017) 113 3

1 ( )

are conditionally independent. The conditional distributions of the e.g. Sklar, 1959 or Nelsen, 2007) and letting yi,j = F Yi,j ui,j in (13),

components of Yi are only influenced by the component i of , a hierarchical Archimedean copula C defined with a multivariate

i.e. (Yi,j | = ) is identically distributed as (Yi,j | i = i ), compound distribution is obtained from the multivariate survival

for i = 1, . . . , d and j = 1, . . . , ni . We assume that (Yi,1 | function given in (19) of the multivariate mixed exponential dis-

i = i ), . . . , (Yi,ni | i = i ) are exponentially distributed with tribution as follows :

parameter i for i = 1, . . . , d. The univariate distribution of Yi, j is ( 1 1

C u = F Y F Y1,1 u1,1 , . . . , F Y1,n u1,n1 , . . . ,

( ) ( ) ( )

therefore a mixed exponential distribution with survival function 1

given by 1 1 ))

F Yd,1 ud,1 , . . . , F Yd,n

( ) (

ud,nd

d

F Yi,j |i =i (yi,j ) dFi (i )

( )

F Yi,j yi,j =

n1 nd

0

1

u1,j , . . . , 1

ud,j ,

( ) ( )

= L L1 Ld (20)

eyi,j i dFi (i ) = Li yi,j ,

( )

= (12) j=1 j=1

0

for i = 1, . . . , d and j = 1, . . . , ni . The inverse of the survival where u = (u1 , . . . , ud ) with ui = (ui,1 , . . . , ui,ni ) for i = 1, . . . , d.

Let us examine more deeply the structure of C . The expression

function F Yi,j in (12) is given by

for the multivariate Archimedean copula in (20) is written in terms

1 of the multivariate LST of the multivariate mixing random vector

i ui,j ,

1

F Yi,j ui,j = L

( ) ( )

(13)

with the sum of the inverse of the corresponding marginal LSTs

where of 1 , . . . , d evaluated at each element of a subgroup as compo-

nents. Hierarchical Archimedean copulas built with our proposed

1 1 1

,

( ) ( ( ))

Li ui,j = LB PM ui,j (14) approach can be seen as multivariate extensions to the classical

i

univariate Archimedean copulas which are defined as a univariate

for ui,j [0, 1], i = 1, . . . , d and j = 1, . . . , ni . Since

LST evaluated at the sum of the inverse of the LST evaluated at each

element of a multivariate uniform random vector as follows:

PM (s) = LM ( ln(s)) (15) ( )

d

and C (u) = L 1

L (ui ) .

i=1

M (u) .

(u) = exp L

1 1

( )

PM (16)

Given the connection with the mixing random vector and the

1 1

We can rewrite L

i in terms of LM as follows: random variables M, Bi (i = 1, . . . , d), an alternative representa-

tion of the copula C in (20) can be established in terms of LM and LBi

1 1

exp(L1

ui,j ) , (i = 1, . . . , d), and Li (i = 1, . . . , d). Indeed, letting (10) and (15)

( ) ( ( ))

Li ui,j = LB M (17)

i

in (20), the hierarchical Archimedean copula C can also be written

for ui,j [0, 1], i = 1, . . . , d and j = 1, . . . , ni . as follows:

The vector of rvs Yi follows a multivariate mixed exponential

ni

( d ( ) )

distribution, which is defined only in terms of LST of the mixing rv ( ))

1

.

( ) (

C u = LM ln LBi Li ui,j (21)

i given in (11) and for which the multivariate survival function

i=1 j=1

corresponds to

Finally, inserting (17) in (21), the hierarchical Archimedean

F Yi (yi ) = F Yi |i =i (yi ) dFi (i ) copula C in (21) can be defined solely in terms of LM and LBi

0 (i = 1, . . . , d) as

ni

F Yi,j |i =i (yi,j ) dFi (i ) C u; LM , LB1 , . . . , LBd

( )

=

0 j=1 ni

( d ( ))

( ( ))))

ni 1

exp L 1

.

( (

= LM ln LBi LB ui , j (22)

eyi,j i dFi (i ) i M

= i=1 j=1

0 j=1

Note that in (22) the terms LM , LB1 , . . . , LBd are explicitly inserted

= Li (yi,1 + + yi,ni ), (18)

as arguments of the function C . We will add these arguments only

where yi = (yi,1 , . . . , yi,ni ), for i = 1, . . . , d. when we find relevant to insist on their implication in the copula

Finally, the vector of rvs Y follows a multivariate mixed ex- representation.

ponential distribution. Most importantly for us, the latter has the

interesting feature of being defined by the vector of mixing rvs , 2.4. Dependence structure of hierarchical Archimedean copulas de-

which follows a multivariate compound distribution. The multi- fined with multivariate compound distributions

variate survival function of Y is represented in terms of the LST

(10) of i.e. Either from (21) or (22), it is clear that the proposed hierarchical

Archimedean copulas have explicit forms and offer many possibil-

F Y y = L y1,1 + + y1,n1 , . . . , yd,1 + + yd,nd ,

( ) ( )

(19) ities of dependence structures through the choices of distributions

for the strictly positive discrete rv M and the strictly positive rvs

where y = y1 , . . . , yd = y1,1 , . . . , y1,n1 , . . . , yd,1 , . . . , yd,nd .

( ) ( )

B1 , . . . , Bd . These copula constructions allow flexibility without

requiring a large number of parameters. As stated in Brechmann

2.3. Construction of hierarchical Archimedean copulas defined with (2014), a major issue of any copula model is to find a good balance

multivariate compound distributions between parsimony and flexibility.

The dependence structure associated to the hierarchical

We use the inversion method to identify the proposed hi- Archimedean copula defined in either (21) or (22) can be illustrated

erarchical Archimedean copula C defined with a multivariate with a tree representation as shown in Fig. 1 in which U =

compound distribution. Indeed, applying Sklars Theorem (see (U1 , . . . , Ud ) with Ui = (Ui,1 , . . . , Ui,ni ) for i = 1, . . . , d, is a vector

4 H. Cossette et al. / Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 76 (2017) 113

the strength of the dependence relations between the rvs of a given

subgroup and also between rvs from different subgroups. In other

words, we want to compare whether the copula generated from L

is more dependent than the one with a generator LM . To do so, we

Fig. 1. One level tree structure. need to introduce the concept of concordance ordering as defined

in Joe (1997) page 37.

of rvs with multivariate cdf C . This shows a one level tree structure Definition 1. Let C1 and C2 be two d-dimensional copulas. C2 is

composed of d subgroups joined together by their common link more concordant that C1 , written C1 c C2 , if

with the rv M. The dependence among the components of Ui is

and C1 u C2 u ,

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

C1 u C2 u

captured by Archimedean copulas generated by the mixing rvs i ,

for i = 1, 2, . . . , d. Then, the dependence relation between the for u [0, 1]d .

vectors U1 , . . . , Un is defined through the rv M.

Let us examine the dependence structure for specific subsets A very useful consequence of the concordance ordering is its

of U. First, the multivariate cdf of (Ui1 , . . . , Uim ) is given by the relation with dependence measures. For instance, if C1 and C2 are

(1)

copulas with respective Kendall taus 1 , 2 , Spearman rhos S ,

hierarchical Archimedean copula (2)

S , tail dependence parameters 1 , 2 , and C1 c C2 , then 1 2 ,

C (ui1 , . . . , uim ; LM , LBi , . . . , LBim ),

1

(23) S(1) S(2) , and 1 2 . (See Joe, 1997.)

Suppose now that C1 and C2 are Archimedean copulas with

for i1 , . . . , im {1, 2, . . . , d} and for m = 2, . . . , d. Also, if we respective generators L1 and L2 . Theorems 4.1 and 4.7 in Joe (1997)

choose at least two subgroups i1 and i2 , the multivariate cdf of any provide the condition that

vector formed with at least two rvs from each one of them is a ( 1guarantees

) that C1 c C2 is verified. Such

a condition states that L 1 L2 is a completely monotone func-

hierarchical Archimedean copula of the similar form. tion.

Now we consider the dependence structure within a subgroup i We recall that our objective is to compare the copula C , gener-

(i = 1, 2, . . . , d). From (20), the multivariate cdf of (Ui,j1 , . . . , Ui,jl ) ated from L , with the one generated from LM (written CM ). Since

(for j1 , . . . , jl {1, 2, . . . , ni } and for l = 2, . . . , ni ) is given by L is related to LM , this condition is easily verified as follows:

( l

)

LM L = LM LM ( ln (LB )) = ln (LB ) .

1 1

C ui,j1 , . . . , ui,jl ; Li = Li 1

( ) ( )

Li ui,k (24)

k=1 Therefore, if ( ln (LB )) is completely monotone, then the de-

pendence within a subgroup is stronger than the outer dependence

which corresponds to an l-variate Archimedean copula with ( gen-) between subgroups, i.e. CM c C and hence M .

erator Li . As a special case, the multivariate cdf of Ui is C ui ; Li

It is well known that ( ln(LBi )) is completely monotone if and

for i = 1, . . . , d. Due to (11) and (17), copulas of the form as given

only if Lm Bi is the LST of a positive rv i.e. LBi for all m N

m

in (24) are Archimedean copulas based on two generators LM and

(see Joe, 1997). Table 1 provides a list of distributions, used to

LBi . Such copulas allow for more flexibility by using at least two

generate an Archimedean copula, for which it is easy to directly

parameters (see e.g. Nelsen, 2007, Section 4.5, for other examples

of two parameter Archimedean copulas).

verify that Lm Bi is the LST of a positive rv. We denote by SNB(m; r , q)

a shifted negative binomial distribution i.e. Bi,1 + + Bi,m admits

Finally, we turn our attention to the dependence structure

a stochastic representation N + m, where N NB(r , q), r R+ and

for vectors of rvs containing at most one component from each m

q (0, 1). For the logarithmic distribution, j=1 Bi,j is an mfold

subgroup of U. For j1 {1, 2, . . . , n1 }, . . . , jd {1, 2, . . . , nd }, the

sum

m of iid logarithmic rvs. If Bi follows a Sibuya distribution,

multivariate cdf of (U1,j1 , . . . , Ud,jd ) is obtained from (10) and (20)

and is given by j=1 Bi,j is distributed as an unknown rv N with probability mass

( m ) ( i )

(1) , k = 1, 2, . . .. Finally,)for a

i+k

function pk = i=1 i k

(

C u1,j1 , . . . , ud,jd = L1 ,...,d L1 u1,j1 , . . . , Ld ud,jd

1 1

( ) ( ( ) ( ))

1

stable distribution i.e. Bi S , 1, cos(/2) , 1{=1} ; 1 , Lm

B i

PM LB1 L1 u1,j1 . . . LBd Ld ud,jd .

( ( 1 ( )) ( 1 ( )))

= is(the LST of a positive rv exponentially tilted

1

) stable distributed

(25) S , 1, (cos(/2)m) , m 1{=1} , h 1{=1} ; 1 with h = 0. For

Using (14), (25) becomes sampling procedures, we refer to Hofert (2011) and Devroye

(2009).

C u1,j1 , . . . , ud,jd

( )

( ( ))) ( ))))

1

. . . 2.6. Examples of hierarchical Archimedean copulas

( 1 ( 1

( 1 (

= PM LB1 LB1 PM u 1 , j1

L B d

L Bd PM u d, j d

= PM PM u1,j1 . . . PM ud,jd

( 1 ( ) 1

( ))

In the following two examples, we give a glimpse of the

flexibility of our approach based on multivariate compound dis-

= LM ln PM1 u1,j1 ln PM1 ud,jd .

( ( ( )) ( ( )))

(26)

tributions in the construction of a large variety of hierarchical

Then, from (16) and (26), we conclude that the multivariate cdf Archimedean copulas C . One must first choose the distribution

of (U1,j1 , . . . , Ud,jd ) is for the strictly positive discrete rv M. Here, we limit ourselves to

( ) shifted-geometric and logarithmic distributions for M. Of course,

d

other candidates would have been suitable, such as the Sibuya and

C u1,j1 , . . . , ud,jd ; LM = LM 1

,

( ) ( )

LM ui,ji (27)

shifted-negative binomial distributions (see e.g. Joe, 2014). Next,

i=1

distributions for the rvs Bi are selected. Either shifted-geometric,

which corresponds to a single-generator Archimedean copula with logarithmic, or gamma distributions are picked. Among the pos-

LM . Given (27), it means that the dependence relation between the sible combinations of distributions, we choose to depict 6 hier-

components of (U1,j1 , . . . , Ud,jd ) is only defined through the rv M. archical Archimedean copulas constructed under the proposed

H. Cossette et al. / Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 76 (2017) 113 5

Table 1

Distributions for the sum of common laws.

Distribution of Bi Lm

B (t) Distribution of Bi,1 + + Bi,m

i

( )m

qet

ShiftedGeometric (q) 1(1q)et

SNB(m; m, q)

( )m r

qet

ShiftedNegativeBinomial (r ; r , q) 1(1q)et

SNB(rm; rm, q)

( )m

ln(1 et ) m

Logarithmic ( ) ln(1 ) i=1 Bi , Bi Logarithmic( )

m

( m ) ( i )

Sibuya ( )

( )

1 (1 et ) N pk = i=1 i k

(1)i+k

)m

Gamma (, 1) 1

Gamma(m, 1)

(

1+t

( 1

) ( 1

)

Stable , 1, cos(/2) , 1{=1} ; 1 (exp(t )) m

S , 1, (cos(/2)m) , m 1{=1} , 0; 1

approach. In the first example, we present 3 copulas with an un- Example 2. We assume that M Logarithmic ( ) with LM (t ) =

ln(1 et ) (1(1 )t )

derlying shifted-geometric distribution for M, while in the second

ln(1 ) M (t ) = ln(

and L1

). Letting = ln(1 )

example a logarithmic distribution describes the behavior of the the multivariate cdf of (U1,j1 , . . . , Ud,jd ) corresponds to the Frank

rv M. By convention, when the distributions for the rvs Bi (i = copula with generator LM , i.e.,

1, . . . , d) are from the same family of distributions (with different ( n ( ui

))

parameters), we refer to the resulting copula as distribution for 1 i=1 1 e

C u1,j1 , . . . , ud,jd ; LM .

( )

= ln 1

M-distribution for Bi hierarchical Archimedean copula. (1 e )n1

qet 1. LogarithmicGeometric hierarchical Archimedean copula:

Example 1. Let M ShifGeo (q) with LM (t ) = 1(1q)et

and

qi et

LM (t ) = ln(

1

q

1

). Letting = 1 q, the multivariate Bi ShifGeo (qi ) with LBi (t ) = 1(1qi )et

and

t +1q

cdf of (U1,j1 , . . . , Ud,jd ) corresponds to the AliMikhailHaq (AMH) LB (t ) = ln( qi 1

1

);

i +1qi

copula with generator LM , i.e., t

i=1 ui copula C :

C u1,j1 , . . . , ud,jd ; LM = n .

( )

( + (1 ) ui ) (1 ) ni=1 ui

i=1

( )

C u

)1

d nj ( qi (1e )

1 (1 e ) qi + 1 qi

1. GeometricGeometric hierarchical Archimedean copula: i=1 j=1 1e

ui,j

)1 ) .

= ln 1

(

d ni ( qi (1e )

qi et 1 (1 qi )

Bi ShifGeo (qi ) with LBi (t ) = 1(1qi )et

and i=1 j=1 1e

ui,j + 1 qi

LB (t ) = ln( qi 1

1

);

i

t +1qi 2. LogarithmicLogarithmic hierarchical Archimedean copula:

parameters: q, qi , . . . , qd (0, 1); t

copula C (see equation given in Box I). Bi Logarithmic (i ) with LBi (t ) = ln(1 i e )

ln(1i )

and

( t

)

(1(1i ) )

LB (t ) = ln

1

2. GeometricLogarithmic hierarchical Archimedean copula: i

;

i

ln(1i et ) parameters: = (1 e ), 1 = (1 e1 ), . . . , d =

Bi Logarithmic (i ) with LBi (t ) = and

ln(1i ) (1 ed ) (0, 1);

(1(1i )t )

LB (t ) = ln(

1

i

); copula C :

i

parameters: q, 1 = (1 e1 ), . . . , d = (1 ed ) ( d

(0, 1); ( ) 1 1

C u = ln 1 (1 e )

copula C : i

i=1

ui,j

( ) ( )

C u i 1e

ni 1e

( ) 1 1 e

ln 1 (1 ei ) .

q

i ui,j +1q

d ni

q i=1 ln

1 (1 ei ) 1 e

1e i

j=1 (1ei )

j=1

= ( )1 .

q

i ui,j +1q

d

i + (1 q)

d

ln 1 (1 ei )

ni

1 e 3. Logarithmic-Gamma hierarchical Archimedean copula:

i=1 i=1 j=1 (1ei )

i

Bi Gamma (i , 1) with LBi (t) = 1

and LB1 (t ) =

( )

1+t i

1

3. Geometric-Gamma hierarchical Archimedean copula: t 1;

i

Bi Gamma (i , 1) with LBi (t ) = 1

and L1

( )

1+t B (t) = i copula C :

1

t 1;i

parameters: q (0, 1), i , . . . , d R+ ; ( )

C u =

1

ln 1 (1 e )

copula C :

( )

C u i

d ni ( ) 1

( ) 1 )i 1 e ui,j i

(ni 1) .

d ni ( q

q i=1 j=1 +1q i

(ni 1)

ui,j

1 e

= ( ) 1 )i . i=1 j=1

d ni (

1 (1 q)

q i

i=1 j=1 ui,j

+1q (ni 1) Obviously, hierarchical Archimedean copulas can be built as-

suming that the distributions of the rvs Bi belong to different

6 H. Cossette et al. / Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 76 (2017) 113

d ni ( ui,j

)

q qi

i=1 j=1 (

ui,j qqi ui,j 1 )

.

( )

C u = d ui,j

ni

( )

(1q) i =1 qi

d ( ni ( j=1

( ) ))

))

ui,j u qqi ui,j 1

1 (1 qi ) 1 ( i,j

i=1 j=1 ( )

(

ui,j qqi ui,j 1 d ni ui,j

i=1 1(1qi ) j=1 u qq u 1

i,j i i,j ( )

Box I.

( ) 1 ) ( ( ( q

)))

n2 ( n1 1 u1,i +1q 1

ln 1 exp

q

q j=1 u2,j

+1q 1 i=1 ln

C (u1 , u2 ) = ))) .

)1 ( ( ( q

1 u1,i +1q 1

(

n2

q n1

j=1 u2,j +1q 1 ln 1 exp i=1

ln

ln (1 ) 1

ln(1 )(1q)1

Box II.

families. Since we cannot list all possible hierarchical Archimedean It is clear that the sampled values of (U1,1 , U1,2 ) provide scat-

copulas that can obtained this way, we limit ourselves to pro- ter plots that are similar to those of the Clayton copula with a

viding, in the following example, an illustration of a hierarchical dependence subdued by the shifted geometric distribution. The

Archimedean copula assuming d = 2 subgroups with different same phenomenon happens for the sampled values of (U2,1 , U2,2 ).

families of distributions B1 and B2 . Since the dependence structures of the four other pairs (U1,1 , U2,1 ),

(U1,1 , U2,2 ), (U1,2 , U2,1 ), (U1,2 , U2,2 ) depend on M, their scatter plots

Example 3. Let d = 2 and M ShiftedGeo(q) with LM (t ) = are those of an AMH copula.

qet ln(1 et )

1(1q)et

, B1 Log( ) with LB1 (t) = ln(1 ) and finally, B2

)

Gamma(, 1) with LB2 (t) = t +1 1 . Then, the expression of the

(

2.8. Multi-level hierarchical Archimedean copulas

3-parameters copula is given by the equation given in Box II.

Until now, we have only considered one-level hierarchical

Archimedean copulas, for which the associated typical one-level

2.7. Sampling hierarchical Archimedean copulas tree representation is provided in Fig. 1. Naturally, it is possible

to design multi-level hierarchical Archimedean copulas by adding

Inspired from Marshall and Olkin (1988), the sampling pro- ramifications such that their dependence structures can be repre-

cedure for a hierarchical Archimedean copula C defined with a sented as multi-level trees.

multivariate compound distribution follows from its construction. Let U = (U1 , . . . , Ud ) be a random vector with a cdf defined by

The algorithm given just below aims to simulate samples of a a multi-level hierarchical Archimedean copula C , such that each

random vector U = (U1 , . . . , Ud ) (with Ui = (Ui,1 , . . . , Ui,ni ), for subgroup Ui , i = 1, . . . , ni , characterized by its genetic code (the

i = 1, . . . , d) whose multivariate cdf is the copula C . path in the hierarchy) ei and its dimension ni , can be written as

Ui = Uei ,j , j = 1, . . . , ni .

( )

Algorithm 1. Let C be a hierarchical Archimedean copula with d

subgroups and root M. Define U as a vector of standard uniformly This genetic code is represented by a vector in which the first

distributed rvs with cdf C . element corresponds to the root of the tree (0 by default) and the

1. Sample M; kth element represents the position of a node in the (k 1)th level,

2. For each subgroup (i = 1, . . . , d 2): within its mothers direct descendants, assuming that the leaves

are always at the far right. A value of 0 at the last position of the

2.1. Sample Bi,k for k = 1, . . . , M; vector represents a direct link between a leaf and a mother node.

M

2.2. Return i = k=1 Bi,k ;

The design of the hierarchical structure comes from considering

2.3. Sample Ri,j Exp(1) for j = 1, . . . , ni ; the primary distribution of the compound rvs as a random sum.

2.4. Return Ui,j = Li (Ri,j /i ) for j = 1, . . . , ni ; Let Ui be a subgroup with genetic code ei , and let be a right

truncated vector of ei , and k the (dim( ) + 1)th element of ei , where

3. Return U = (U1,1 , . . . , U1,n1 , . . . , Ud,1 , . . . , Ud,nd ). dim(.) is the dimension of a vector. On one hand, if dim( ) <

An application of Algorithm 1 is provided in the following dim(ei ) 1, then the rv M ( ,k) is defined as a random sum, i.e,

M ( ) ( ,k) ( ,k)

example. M ( ,k) = j=1 Nj where Nj is distributed as a discrete rv

N ( ,k) which plays the same role as the rv Bi in Section 2.1. On the

Example 4. Let C be the Geometric-Gamma hierarchical Archime- other hand, if dim( ) = dim(ei ) 1, then the procedure is similar

dean copula presented in Example 1 with d = 2 and n1 = n2 = to the one presented in Section 2.1.

2. To illustrate the pairwise dependence between components of A typical hierarchical structure can be depicted by a tree where

U = (U1,1 , U1,2 , U2,1 , U1,2 ), we give, in Fig. 2, a graph of sampled the root is always M (0) and all leaves are of type u. A node of type

values of U, where the parameters of the copula C are q = 0.1, M, at a given level of the tree, can have children of all available

1 = 0.04 and 2 = 0.2. Note that , in Fig. 2, corresponds to the types, meaning M, and u. Further, nodes can only have

Kendalls tau. u children (leaves), while leaves have no children at all.

H. Cossette et al. / Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 76 (2017) 113 7

Fig. 2. Pairwise graph of the 10 000 4-dimensional vectors of realizations sampled from the hierarchical Archimedean copula with multivariate compound distributions in

Example 4.

1. Fix j = 2

2. For each genetic code with dim(ei ) = j do:

i. Sample R Exp(1)

ii. Set the corresponding component of Ui as L (e )

( ) M i

R

M (ei )

Fig. 3. Example of a multi-level hierarchical structure.

2.3. Else:

i. Sample (ei )

To illustrate the notation, let us consider the tree construction ii. Sample R Exp(1)

depicted in Fig. 3: iii. Set the

The tree in Fig. 3 corresponds to the dependence structure of ( ) corresponding component of Ui as L (ei )

R

a random vector U = (U1 , . . . , U8 ) characterized by the following (ei )

genetic codes:

3. Set j = j + 1

e1 = (0, 1, 1) e2 = (0, 1, 2) e3 = (0, 1, 3) e4 = (0, 1, 0)

4. Repeat from 2

5. Return U.

e5 = (0, 2) e6 = (0, 3, 1) e7 = (0, 3, 0) e8 = (0, 0)

Algorithm 2 proceeds as follows: we start by simulating the

Note that, one can deduce a tree from any given set of genetic

root, which is always of type M. Next, we perform a series of

codes. This set of codes constitutes a simple tool to summarize all

the information in regard to the dependence structure depicted by simulations in the following order: simulate all u-children of the

the tree. root, simulate all -children of the root then simulate all M-

For any given multi-level hierarchical copula, it is possible to de- children of the root. Finally, we move the root to M and repeat the

rive a tailored sampling procedure by adapting the one described same logic over again.

in Algorithm 1. Algorithm 2 provides a sampling procedure for In the following illustration, we provide an example of a 2-level

several hierarchical levels, assuming the three different types of hierarchical Archimedean copula.

children.

Example 5 (Two level tree). We consider a 2-level hierarchical

Algorithm 2. Let C be a multi-level hierarchical copula with root Archimedean copula C , for which the associated 2-level tree repre-

M (0) and d subgroups. Define U as a vector of standard uniformly sentation is given in Fig. 4. The 6-dimensional copula C is the mul-

distributed rvs with cdf C . Let ei be the genetic code of each tivariate cdf of the random vector U = (U(0,2),1 , U(0,2),2 , U(0,1,1),1 ,

subgroup i and let ei be the vector ei without the last element. U(0,1,1),2 , U(0,1,2),1 , U(0,1,1),2 ). Let the rvs (0,2) , (0,1,1) , and (0,1,2)

8 H. Cossette et al. / Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 76 (2017) 113

very flexible combinations of Archimedean copula families with-

out such restrictions. Given their similar nature, it is of interest

to push further their comparison. For that purpose, we use the

common mixture representation of a copula to write the proposed

hierarchical Archimedean copula. This will also prove useful for

further investigation of aggregation methods.

Using (20) and (21), the common mixture representation of a hi-

Fig. 4. Two level tree structure. erarchical Archimedean copula based on a multivariate compound

distribution is given by

n1 nd

1

u1,j , . . . , 1

( ) ( ) ( )

C u = L1 ,...,d L1 Ld ud,j

(U(0,1,2),1 , U(0,1,2),2 ). j=1 j=1

(0,1)

M (0) (0,1) (0,2)

M (0) (0,2)

We define M = k=1 Nk , = k=1 Bk and n1 nd

M (0,1) (0,1,i)

1

( )

1

( )

(0,1,i) = k=1 Bk , for i = 1, 2. = PM LB1 L u1,j LBd

1

L ud,j d

By first conditioning on M (0,1) and then on M (0) , the LST of j=1 j=1

(0,1,i) can be written as

d

ni

L ui,j fM (m) .

1

Lm

( )) ( )

= (29)

(

B

LB(0,1,i) (t ) .

i i

L (0,1,i) (t) = PM (0) PN (0,1) m=1 i=1 j=1

Similarly, we obtain the trivariate LST of ( (0,2) , (0,1,1) , (0,1,2) ), write the copula given in (29) as

which is given by

d (

(ui,j )

(n )

1

i L

)

L (0,2) , (0,1,1) , (0,1,2) (t1 , t2 , t3 )

vi

dFVi (vi ) fM (m).

( )

j=1

C u = e i (30)

0

( )) m=1 i=1

(

= PM (0) LB(0,2) (t1 ) PN (0,1) LB(0,1,1) (t2 ) LB(0,1,2) (t3 ) .

From the common mixture representation given in (30), we adapt

Algorithm 1 and provide below a more efficient one.

Thus, the 6-dimensional copula C can be written as

Algorithm 3. Let C be a hierarchical Archimedean copula with d

C (u(0,2),1 , u(0,2),2 , u(0,1,1),1 , u(0,1,1),2 , u(0,1,2),1 , u(0,1,2),2 )

subgroups and root M0 . Define U as a vector of standard uniformly

2

( distributed rvs with cdf C .

= L (0,2) , (0,1,1) , (0,1,2) L

1

(u

(0,2) (0,2),k

),

k=1

1. Sample M0 ;

2 2 2. For each subgroup (i = 1, . . . , d 2):

)

L

1

(u

(0,1,1) (0,1,1),k

), L

1

(u

(0,1,2) (0,1,2),k

) . (28) 2.1. Sample Vi with LVi (t) = LB 0 (t);

M

i

k=1 k=1 2.2. Sample Ri,j Exp(1) for j = 1, . . . , ni ;

We assume that M (0) ShiftedGeo(0.5), N (0,1) ShiftedGeo(0.1) 2.3. Return Ui,j = Li (Ri,j /Vi ) for j = 1, . . . , ni ;

and B(0,2) B(0,1,1) B(0,1,2) Gamma( = 30 1

, = 1). In 3. Return U = (U1,1 , . . . , U1,n1 , . . . , Ud,1 , . . . , Ud,nd ).

Fig. 5, considering that B(0,2) , B(0,1,1) and B(0,1,2) are iid, we clearly

see the impact of M (0) and M (0,1) on their respective dependence In order to confirm the efficiency of Algorithm 3, let us consider

structure. Using the numbered boxes with coordinates (x, y) in a simple one level tree hierarchical Archimedean copula with two

Fig. 5, the scatter plot associated to the pair (U(0,2),1 , U(0,1),2 ) (see groups where M Geo(q), B1 Gamma(2.5, 1) and B2

box (5, 1)) has a shape that is the closest to the one of a Clayton Gamma(2.5, 1). The top graph of Fig. 6 serves as an illustration to

copula with a dependence parameter of 30. This phenomenon is compare computation times (in seconds) between Algorithms 1

explained by the fact that the couple depends only on M (0) with a and 3 for 100 000 realizations with respect to q, while the bottom

one compares both algorithms with respect to the sampling size.

parameter of 0.5, which in turn has little to no impact on (0,2) .

Evidently, Algorithm 3 is far more efficient. In fact, Algorithm 3 has

The scatter plot for the pair (U(0,1,1),1 , U(0,1,1),2 ) (see box (1, 5)),

a very small computation time since we sample directly from the

however, shows a dependence restrained by M (0,1) , which has

known distribution of the sum in step 2.1 of Algorithm 3.

a much bigger impact due to its overall higher values. We can

also see that boxes {(1, 1), (1, 2), . . . , (4, 1), (4, 2)} only depend 4. Comparisons with other construction methodologies of hi-

on M (0) , which implies a very small dependence. However, boxes erarchical Archimedean copulas

{(1, 3), (1, 4), (2, 3), (2, 4)} depend on M (0,1) , a rv compounded on

M (0) . As discussed in Section 2.5, the copula generated from M (0,1) 4.1. Links with nested Archimedean copulas

is more concordant than the one generated from M (0) and hence

M (0,1) M (0) . Now that hierarchical Archimedean copulas with multivariate

compound distributions are written as common mixtures, we aim

3. Representation of the copula as a common mixture to compare them to nested Archimedean copulas. To do so, we con-

sider a simple example of a one level partially nested Archimedean

The functional symmetry of Archimedean copulas lead to the copula with d children copulas i.e.

introduction by Joe (1997) of nested Archimedean copulas. This

C u = C C u1 ; 1 , . . . , C ud ; d ; 0

( ) ( ( ) ( ) )

popular class of copulas results from nesting Archimedean copulas

into each other, allowing asymmetries and multiple hierarchy d ni

= 0 01 i i1 ui,j ,

( )

levels. Such constructions are however limited by nesting condi- (31)

tions that must be fulfilled. In contrast, hierarchical Archimedean i=1 j=1

H. Cossette et al. / Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 76 (2017) 113 9

Fig. 5. Pairwise graph of 10 000 6-dimensional vectors of realizations sampled from the hierarchical Archimedean copula with multivariate compound distributions in

Example 5.

( )

(32) is a proper copula if and only if 0i is the LST of a positive rv,

say Wi , i.e.

d (

i1 (ui,j )

(n )

i

)

wi

dFWi (wi ) fR (r).

( )

j=1

C u = e (33)

r =1 i=1 0

and hence that the sufficient nesting condition is verified, is not an

easy task. Nesting together different Archimedean families has its

limitations and parameter restrictions (see e.g. Hofert, 2010).

We can clearly see that the representation in (30) of the hierar-

chical Archimedean copula with multivariate compound distribu-

tions and the one in (33) of the nested Archimedean copula have

the same general form. In order to compare these two representa-

tions, we rewrite Lm

B (t) as i

1

mL

Lm

Bi (t) =e M

Li (t)

= 0i (t ; m). (34)

Fig. 6. Top: Computation time (sec) for Algorithms 1 and 3 with respect to

q. Bottom: Computation time (sec) for Algorithms 1 and 3 with respect to the Expressing Lm Bi as 0i allows us to represent the hierarchical

sampling size (n) with q = 0.01. Archimedean copula with multivariate compound distributions in

(30) as the partially nested Archimedean copula in (32), where

the mother copula C0 is generated from the rv M, and the child

copula Ci is generated from i . Note that Ci is an Archimedean

where is the generator of the Archimedean copula C . If we copula derived from i =

M

j=1 Bi,j , which is in general not a well

suppose that 0 is the LST of a discrete strictly positive rv R, then, known distribution and expressed in terms of the rv M. Given that

(31) becomes 0i = Lm Bi , we have that 0i solely depends in our structure on

the distribution of Bi unlike in the nested Archimedean copulas in

d

i1 (ui,j ) which both the mother and the child copulas affect 0i , leading

(n )

r 01 i i

( )

j=1

C u = e fR (r) to a restrictive nesting condition. Also, since Lm Bi depends only on

r =1 i=1 the parameters of Bi regardless of the distribution of the rv M,

d

ni

the choice of Ms distribution is very flexible in comparison to the

= 0i i1 (ui,j ); r fR (r), (32) nested Archimedean copulas, where nesting different families is a

r =1 i=1 j=1 recurrent problem.

10 H. Cossette et al. / Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 76 (2017) 113

The above remarks imply that the hierarchical Archimedean Table 1 of Hering et al. (2010) provides a short list of possible

copula C , as defined in (20) can be represented as a nested distributions for V , which can be either discrete or continuous. The

Archimedean copula as follows: random time rv V is used as a common factor to define the vector

of rvs

C (u) = C (C (u1 ; L1 ), . . . , C (ud ; Ld ); LM ). (35)

(V ) = (1) (V ) , . . . , (d) (V ) .

( )

Since the hierarchical Archimedean copulas proposed in this

paper can be written as a nested Archimedean copula, one may Given V , the rvs (i) (V ), for i = 1, . . . , d, are assumed to be

wonder if we can produce similar copulas from both approaches. conditionally independent. This implies that the multivariate LST

To do so, we have to find the distribution of Bi for which (35) is a of (V ) is obtained as follows :

known nested Archimedean copula. (1)

[ (d)

]

Let M be a positive and discrete rv and i (i = 1, . . . , d) be L(V ) (x1 , . . . , xd ) = E ex1 (V ) exd (V )

strictly positive rvs generating known Archimedean copulas. In [ [ (1 ) (d)

]]

this case, the distribution of the rvs Bi can be deduced from = EV E ex1 (V ) exd (V ) |V

= E eV 1 (x1 ) eV d (xd )

( )

1

[ ]

L Li (t)

1

.

( )

M

LBi (t) = PM Li (t) = e (36) [ V ( (x )++ (x )) ]

=E e 1 1 d d

From (34), (36) becomes

= LV (1 (x1 ) + + d (xd )) . (40)

Lm

Bi (t) = 01 (t ; m), (37)

Following a similar procedure to the one presented in Sec-

which means that tion 2.2, Hering et al. (2010) propose to construct multivariate

m

mixed exponential distributions using (V ). Let

Wi = Bi ,

Y = Y1,1 , . . . , Y1,n1 , . . . , Yd,1 , . . . , Yd,nd

( )

k=1

where Wi is the rv generating 01 (.; m). be a vector of n1 + + nd rvs. Given (V ) = , it is assumed that

To illustrate this idea, let (35) be a nested AMHAMH copula. Y1,1 | (V ) = , . . . , Y1,n1 | (V ) = , . . . ,

( ) ( )

To obtain such a copula with our approach, we must have M

Yd,1 | (V ) = , . . . , Yd,nd | (V ) =

( ) ( )

Geo(1

( ) 0 ) and i Geo(1 i ) which implies that Bi Geo

) given (V ) = =

1i

10

, 0 i (i = 1, . . . , d). Similarly, in order for (35) to be a are conditionally independent. Also,

( 1 , . . (.i), d ) , the)rv Yi,j | (V ) = is identically distributed as

(

(

nested JoeJoe copula, our approach requires that M

( Sibuya( 0 )

Yi,j | (V () = i for j = 1), 2, . . .(, ni , i = 1, 2, . . .), d. We as-

)

i

and i Sibuya(i ) which implies that Bi Sibuya 0

, i

sume that Yi,1 |(i) (V ) = i , . . . , Yi,ni |(i) (V ) = i are expo-

0 (i = 1, . . . , d).

nentially distributed with parameter i , for i = 1, . . . , d. Then, Y

The representation in (35) can be easily generalized to multi-

follows a multivariate mixed exponential distribution with multi-

level hierarchical structures by adapting the notation presented in

variate survival function given by

Section 2.8. For example, (28) can also be written as

F Y y1,1 , . . . , y1,n1 , . . . , yd,1 , . . . , yd,nd

( )

C (u1 , u2 , u3 ) = C C C u1 ; L (0,1,1) , C u2 ; L (0,1,2) ; LM (0,1) ,

( ( ( ) ( ) )

(1) (V )y (1) (V )y

[

C u3 ; L (0,2) ; LM (0) , = E e 1 ,1 e 1,n1

( ) )

(38)

where u1 = (u(0,1,1),1 , u(0,1,1),2 ), u2 = (u(0,1,2),1 , u(0,1,2),2 ) and (d) (V )y (d) (V )y

]

e d,1 e d,nd

. (41)

u3 = (u(0,2),1 , u(0,2),2 ). Notation wise, (38) can be simplified to

Due to (40), we can write (41) as

C (u1 , u2 , u3 )

F Y y1,1 , . . . , y1,n1 , . . . , yd,1 , . . . , yd,nd

( )

= C (0) C (0,1) C (0,1,1) u1 , C (0,1,2) u2 , C (0,2) u3 .

( ( ( ) ( )) ( ))

(39)

= L(V ) y1,1 + + y1,n1 , . . . , yd,1 + + yd,nd

( )

( ( ) ( ))

4.2. Approach based on Lvy subordinators and random time

(42)

In this section, we examine the link between the approach

proposed by Hering et al. (2010) to construct hierarchical Also, the univariate survival function of Yi,j is

Archimedean copulas and the one described within this paper. [ (i) (V )y

]

F Yi,j yi,j = E e = L(i) (V ) yi,j = LV i yi,j

( ) ( ) ( ( ))

i ,j

The construction approach by Hering et al. (2010) is based on

increasing Lvy processes, also called Lvy subordinators. They are

= 0 i yi,j = 0 i yi,j ,

( ( )) ( )

(43)

notably important components for building models in financial

mathematics (see { e.g. Cont and}Tankov, 2003). for yi,j 0, j = 1, 2, . . . , ni , and i = 1, . . . , d.

Let (i) = (i) (t ) , t 0 be a Lvy subordinator, for i = Then, using Sklars Theorem, the copula associated to F Y is given

1, 2, . . . , d. For all x, t 0, the LST of (i) (t ) is given by by

(i)

[ ]

L(i) (t ) (x) = E ex (t ) = et i (x) ,

( 1 1

C u = F Y F Y1,1 u1,1 , . . . , F Y1,n u1,n1 , . . . ,

( ) ( ) ( )

1

F Yd,1 ud,1 , . . . , F Yd,n ,

( ) (

ud,nd (44)

for i = 1, 2, . . . , d. d

where F Yi,j is obtained from (43) i.e.

by

1

LV (x) = E eVx = 0 (x) ,

[ ]

F Yi,j ui,j = L1

ui,j = i1 01 ui,j = i1 01 ui,j ,

( ) ( ) ( ( )) ( )

(i) (V )

for x 0. (45)

H. Cossette et al. / Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 76 (2017) 113 11

for ui,j [0, 1], j = 1, 2, . . . , ni , and i =( 1), . . . , d. Combining (44) strategies appear similar. Both approaches can lead to the same

and (45) with (42), the expression for C u becomes hierarchical Archimedean copula in some cases. However, others

( can only be obtained with one of the two methods. For all the

C u = L(V ) L1

u1,1 + + L1

u1,n1 , . . . ,

( ) ( ) ( )

(1) (V ) (1) (V )

popular L vy subordinators provided in Table 2 of Hering et al.

)) (2010), it is possible to define the distribution of Bi such that its

Laplace exponent i is equal to the Laplace exponent i of (i) ,

1 1

ud,1 + + L

( ) (

L

(d) (V ) (d) (V )

u1,nd

( d

) i = 1, 2, . . . , d. For example, if Bi follows a gamma distribution

with parameters and 1, then i (x) = ln (1 + x) as in (ii) of

= 0 i i 0 ui,1 + + i 0 ui,ni .

( 1 1

( ) 1 1

( ))

Table 2 ( is a scaling factor) then the expressions for L(i) (V ) and

i=1

Li are identical (assuming LV = LM ). If B( i follows an inverse

In Hering et al. (2010), conditions for admissible Lvy subordina-

)

Gaussian with parameters 1

and 1, i (x) = 2x

2

+ 1 1 as in

tors are given in Theorem 2.1 and a list of popular Lvy subordina-

tors can be found in Table 2. (iii) of Table 2 ( is a scaling factor) then it follows that L(i) (V )

We may now compare both approaches and the resulting hi- and Li have the same expression (assuming LV = LM ). Also,

erarchical Archimedean copulas. Under both approaches, a hier- under the assumption LV = LM (i.e. V is a discrete rv) and since

archical Archimedean copula is identified from the joint survival the rv Bi can follow many distributions including the ones listed

function of a multivariate mixed exponential distribution. In both in Table 1 of Hering et al. (2010), the proposed method provides

cases, it leads to natural generic sampling algorithms for hier- a larger range of possible hierarchical Archimedean copulas in

archical Archimedean copulas. The dependence structure of the comparison to Hering et al. (2010)s construction method. If V is

multivariate mixed exponential distribution is defined through a a continuous rv, the resulting hierarchical Archimedean copula

vector of dependent mixing rvs, obtained with Hering et al. (2010)s approach cannot be obtained

with our approach.

(V ) = (1) (V ) , . . . , (d) (V )

( )

Finally, inspired from Hering et al. (2010), the expression of the

hierarchical Archimedean copula constructed under our proposed

in Hering et al. (2010), and through

approach given in (20) becomes

= (1 , . . . , d )

1 u1,1 + + L1 u1,n1 , . . . , Ld ud,1

1 1 1

C u = L L

( ) ( ( ) ( ) ( )

within this paper. Even if these two vectors of rvs are defined + + L 1

( ))

d ud,nd

through different probabilistic arguments (Lvy subordinators ( d )

with a common random time and random sums with a common (

i i LM ui,1 + + i LM ui,ni

1 1 1 1

.

( ) ( ))

counting rv), both approaches lead to identical generic structures = LM

for L(V ) and L and for L(i) (V ) and Li . The expression for L(i) (V ) i=1

is

4.3. Estimation procedure and determination of the tree structure

L(i) (V ) (x) = LV (i (x)) ,

for i = 1, . . . , d. Let us define the function i associated to LBi such The main objective of the present work is to propose an al-

that ternative approach to construct hierarchical Archimedean copu-

las. The interestingness of these new copulas also relies on the

LBi (x) = exp (i (x)) , capability to estimate them. Recently, different research works

or, equivalently, have appeared in the literature on the estimation of hierarchical

Archimedean copulas, more specifically on the structure determi-

i (x) = ln LBi (x) ,

( )

nation and the parameter estimation. Okhrin et al. (2013) appears

to be the first paper to address simultaneously both of these

for i = 1, 2, . . . , d. Then, the expression for Li becomes

tasks through a multi-stage procedure in a bottom-up manner.

Li (x) = PM LBi (x) = LM ln LBi (x) = LM (i (x)) ,

( ) ( )

Maximum-likelihood estimation is used for the parameters and the

inversion of Kendalls tau is also suggested. The structure deter-

for i = 1, . . . , d. Note that mination is investigated in several ways, with notably approaches

L(V ) (x1 , . . . , xd ) = LV (1 (x1 ) + + d (xd )) based on a goodness-of-fit test or binary trees. In Grecki et al.

(2016a) and Grecki and Holea (2013), the estimator for both

and the structure and the parameters of hierarchical Archimedean

L (x1 , . . . , xd ) = LM (1 (x1 ) + + d (xd )) . copulas is based on Kendalls tau, more precisely on the inversion of

Kendalls tau estimator. They use agglomerative hierarchical clus-

The rvs V and M play similar roles as a common factor. As tering (with three different definitions for the distance between

mentioned earlier, the rv V can be either discrete or continuous. clusters) in which the relationship between two rvs is established

Under the approach proposed within this paper, M is a strictly through their Kendalls tau. Other research papers, such as Uyt-

positive discrete rv. If V is a strictly positive discrete rv, than LV and tendaele (2016) and Segers and Uyttendaele (2014) estimate the

LM are identical. Also, both LV and LM correspond to the generator structure differently by considering either trivariate structures or

0 in the definition of a nested Archimedean copula. supertrees.

Finally, both i and i correspond to the function 01 1 which These works mainly focus on hierarchical Archimedean copulas

can be found in the definition of the nested Archimedean copula in which all copulas in the tree are from the same Archimedean

and for which it is difficult to verify the conditions of admissibility. family. An excellent paper, Grecki et al. (2016b), paves the way

In conclusion, the approaches proposed both in Hering et al. (2010) to the estimation of the structure and the parameters of hierar-

and within the present paper circumvent this difficulty. Note that chical Archimedean copulas involving different Archimedean fam-

i plays the same role as i (the Laplace exponent of the Lvy ilies. This new estimation procedure, which is in part based on

subordinator (i) ). goodness-of-fit tests, adopts estimation algorithms from previous

The construction method provided in this paper and Hering papers in a way that guarantees the verification of the nesting

et al. (2010)s approach have their own advantages even if their condition. In the same context of different family generators, Zhu

12 H. Cossette et al. / Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 76 (2017) 113

estimation approach based on a clustering procedure to choose the Values of the variance, VaR and TVaR of S = X1,1 + + X1,40 + X2,1 + + X2,40

where the joint cdf FX1,1 ,...,X1,40 ,X2,1 ,...,X2,40 is as defined in Example 6.

optimal hierarchical structure as an estimation of a Lvy subordi-

nated hierarchical Archimedean copula. Risk measures Cossette et al. (2017) Sampling (1M)

Given the similarities of our construction with the one of Hering Var(S) 1157.4461 1156.8011

et al. (2010) discussed in Section 4.2, the approach suggested in Zhu VaR0.9 (S) 193.0000 193.0000

TVaR0.9 (S) 214.4829 214.4334

et al. (2016) is evidently a good starting point for the estimation of VaR0.99 (S) 240.0000 240.0000

our structure based on maximum likelihood. This should be com- TVaR0.99 (S) 252.1244 252.2950

pared with the method proposed in Grecki et al. (2016b), based on VaR0.999 (S) 267.0000 268.0000

Kendalls tau estimator, which allows the use of Archimedean cop- TVaR0.999 (S) 276.1494 276.4880

ulas from different copula families as the proposed construction VaR0.9999 (S) 287.0000 288.0000

TVaR0.9999 (S) 293.5822 294.8900

here. Contrarily to the nested Archimedean copulas approach, we

will not be confronted with the difficulties surrounding the nesting

condition. However, the flexibility of our new structure leads to d

new challenges in regard to finding the optimal solution among all Let S = i=1 Si , where Si = Xi,1 + + Xi,ni , for i = 1, 2, . . . , d.

possible structures. This mainly concerns for us, firstly, the choice To find the desired cdf of S, one may apply the approach proposed

of the appropriate LST of M and then the choice of the LSTs of in Cossette et al. (2017). To do so however, we must assume Vi to be

the rvs Bi (i = 1, . . . , d). This will be followed by the estimation a strictly positive discrete rv defined on {1, 2, . . .}, with probability

of the parameters of the hierarchical Archimedean copulas. These mass function fVi (vi ) = Pr(Vi = vi ), Vi = 1, 2, . . . In such a case,

questions are at the core of another ongoing research project. (47) becomes

FX x1,1 , . . . , xd,nd

( )

5. Aggregation method ( n )

d

i

( ))

fVi (vi ) fM (m).

(

Risk aggregation comes into play for tasks such as the analysis = FXi,j |M =m,Vi =vi xi,j

of a risk portfolio and regularly capital calculations within and m=1 i=1 vi =1 j=1

between risk categories. In this section, we examine the behav- We provide next an example to illustrate the applicability of the

ior of aggregated dependent risks with multivariate cdf defined aggregation procedure proposed in Cossette et al. (submitted for

through a hierarchical Archimedean copula based on multivariate publication) in the context of the new construction given in this

compound distributions. paper. Since the method of Cossette et al. (submitted for publica-

Let X = (X1,1 , . . . , X1,n1 , . . . , Xd,1 , . . . , Xd,nd ) be a random vec- tion) leads to exact results, the following example also shows the

tor with the following multivariate cdf defined with an underlying precision of the values obtained with Algorithm 3.

hierarchical Archimedean copula as given in (21) and marginals

FXi,j (for i = 1, . . . , d and j = 1, . . . , ni ) a portfolio of 80 risks X = X1,1 , . . . , X1,40 ,

(

Example 6. Consider

X2,1 , . . . , X2,40 with a multivariate cdf defined as in (46) with

)

FX x1,1 , . . . , x1,n1 , . . . , xd,1 , . . . , xd,nd

( )

d = 2 and n1 = n2 = 40. We assume M Logarithmic(0 .5),)

B1 Geo(0.8) and B2 Geo(0.9). Let Xs,i Binom 10, qs,i

( (

= C FX1,1 x1,1 , . . . , FX1,n1 x1,n1 , . . . ,

( ) ( )

where qs,i = 0.05 s + 0.005i, s = 1, 2 and i = 1, 2, . . . , 40. It

)) 2 40

FXd,1 xd,1 , . . . , FXd,n xd,nd implies that E [S ] = 142. Relevant measures of S = i=1 Xs,i

( ) (

s=1

d

can be obtained with the approach of Cossette et al. (submitted for

n1 nd publication) or with MC simulations using Algorithm 3. Note that

L1 FX1,i x1,i , . . . , Ld FXd,j xd,j .

1 1

( ( )) ( ( ))

= L (46) the distributions of M and Bi are not from the same families. Both

i=1 j=1 risk measures, VaR and TVaR, are given in Table 2 to illustrate rele-

vant results for both methods as a mean of comparison. Note that

Since the vectors of rvs (Xi,1 | i = i ), . . . , (Xi,ni | i = i ),

the approach of Cossette et al. (submitted for publication) always

for i 1, . . . , d, are conditionally independent given i = i and

provides exact results for discrete marginals FXi,j . Moreover, the

(X1,j1 | M = m), . . . , (Xd,jd | M = m), for ji 1, . . . , ni , are also

simulation results are very close to the actual results, considering

conditionally independent given M = m, FX can be represented as

1 million simulations were done.

a common mixture of conditional cdfs as

( )

6. Conclusion

FX |M =m x1,1 , . . . , x1,n1 , . . . , xd,1 , . . . , xd,nd fM (m)

( )

= A new hierarchical Archimedean copulas construction method

m=1 involving multivariate compound distributions was presented. The

ni absence of nesting and marginal conditions enlarges the possi-

d

( )

FXi,j |M =m,i =i xi,j dF i (i ) fM (m).

( )

= (47) bilities of nested copulas by improving the flexibility in both the

m=1 i=1 0 j=1 choice of families and parameters. Moreover, new copulas with

multiple parameters were derived allowing for a large variety of

To find the expression of the conditional cdfs FXi,j |M =m,i =i , we dependence structures. In addition to the new parametric copu-

use the common mixture representation given in (30). We obtain

las, well-known Archimedean copulas can be obtained as special

cases. Closed form expressions have been derived for the copulas.

FX x1,1 , . . . , xd,nd

( )

To further complement our theoretical results, efficient sampling

d (

(xi,j ) algorithms have been developed for computational applications.

(n ( ))

1

i L

)

vi FX

= e j=1 i i,j dFVi (vi ) fM (m). (48)

0

m=1 i=1 Acknowledgments

( )

Given (47) and (48), we have FXi,j |M =m,Vi =vi xi,j =

This work was partially supported by the Natural Sciences

FXi,j (xi,j )

( ( ))

1

vi L

e i , for i = 1, . . . , d 2 and j = 1, . . . , ni . and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Cossette: 054993;

H. Cossette et al. / Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 76 (2017) 113 13

Marceau: 053934) and by the Chaire en actuariat de lUniversit Hering, C., Hofert, M., Mai, J.-F., Scherer, M., 2010. Constructing hierarchical

Laval (Cossette, Gadoury, Marceau, and Mtalai: FO502323). Helpful archimedean copulas with lvy subordinators. J. Multivariate Anal. 101 (6),

14281433.

comments by two anonymous referees on earlier versions of the

Hofert, M., 2010. Sampling Nested Archimedean Copulas with Applications to cdo

manuscript have been highly appreciated. Pricing. (Ph.D. Thesis), Universitt Ulm.

Hofert, M., 2011. Efficiently sampling nested Archimedean copulas. Comput. Statist.

References Data Anal. 55 (1), 5770.

Hofert, M., 2012. A stochastic representation and sampling algorithm for nested

Bedford, T., Cooke, R.M., 2002. Vines: A new graphical model for dependent random archimedean copulas. J. Stat. Comput. Simul. 82 (9), 12391255.

variables. Ann. Statist. 10311068. Joe, H., 1997. Multivariate Models and Multivariate Dependence Concepts. CRC

Brechmann, E.C., 2014. Hierarchical kendall copulas: Properties and inference. Press.

Canad. J. Statist. 42 (1), 78108. Joe, H., 2014. Dependence Modeling with Copulas. CRC Press.

Cont, R., Tankov, P., 2003. Financial Modelling with Jump Processes, vol. 2, 2003. Kimberling, C.H., 1974. A probabilistic interpretation of complete monotonicity.

Chapman & Hall/CRC, London. Aequationes Math. 10 (2), 152164.

Cossette, H., Marceau, E., Mtalai, I., Veilleux, D., 2017. Archimedean copulas: aggre- Marshall, A.W., Olkin, I., 1988. Families of multivariate distributions. J. Amer. Statist.

gation, capital allocation and other applications. Available At http://Ssrn.Com/ Assoc. 83 (403), 834841.

Abstract=2957181. McNeil, A.J., 2008. Sampling nested archimedean copulas. J. Stat. Comput. Simul.

Devroye, L., 2009. Random variate generation for exponentially and polynomially 78 (6), 567581.

tilted stable distributions. ACM Trans Modeling Comput. Simul. 19 (4), 18. Nelsen, R.B., 2007. An Introduction to Copulas. Springer Science & Business Media.

Feller, W., 1971. An Introduction to Probability and Its Applications, Vol. II. Wiley, Okhrin, O., Okhrin, Y., Schmid, W., 2013. On the structure and estimation of hierar-

New York. chical archimedean copulas. J. Econometrics 173 (2), 189204.

Grecki, J., Hofert, M., Holea, M., 2016a. An approach to structure determination Segers, J., Uyttendaele, N., 2014. Nonparametric estimation of the tree structure of

and estimation of hierarchical archimedean copulas and its application to a nested archimedean copula. Comput. Statist. Data Anal. 72, 190204.

bayesian classification. J. Intell. Inf. Syst. 46 (1), 2159. Sklar, M., 1959. Fonctions de rpartition n dimensions et leurs marges. Universit

Grecki, J., Hofert, M., Holea, M., 2016b. On structure, family and parameter esti- Paris 8.

mation of hierarchical archimedean copulas. ArXiv Preprint arXiv:1611.09225. Uyttendaele, N., 2016. On the estimation of nested archimedean copulas: A theo-

Grecki, J., Holea, M., 2013. Structure determination and estimation of hierarchical retical and an experimental comparison.

archimedean copulas based on kendall correlation matrix. In: International Zhu, W., Wang, C.-W., Tan, K.S., 2016. Structure and estimation of Lvy subordinated

Workshop on New Frontiers in Mining Complex Patterns. Springer, hierarchical Archimedean copulas (LSHAC): Theory and empirical tests. J. Bank.

pp. 132147. Finance 69, 2036.

- Worksheet Binomial Distribution ProblemsUploaded byonek1ed
- Literature Review Foriegn ExchangeUploaded byonline free projects
- Unit-1A-pqtUploaded byHarshitha Senthil
- UT Dallas Syllabus for te3341.521.07u taught by Hlaing Minn (hxm025000)Uploaded byUT Dallas Provost's Technology Group
- Game Theory Lecture NotesUploaded byhgopalkrishnan
- Discrete Particle Size Distribution May 2011Uploaded byAnonymous NxpnI6jC
- UT Dallas Syllabus for stat5351.501 05f taught by Yuly Koshevnik (yxk055000)Uploaded byUT Dallas Provost's Technology Group
- Http Myservices.relianceada.com BillSummaryPDFDetails.do List=1 500000959445 14 Aug 2010 443Uploaded byvissu.viit
- Probability I 2014Uploaded byalan
- PnetworkUploaded byserf007
- New Microsoft Excel WorksheetUploaded bypsk257149
- Industrial Course SyllabiUploaded byIbrahim Alhowaish
- Fast Remote but Not Extreme Quantiles With Multiple Factors Applications to Solvency II and Enterprise Risk ManagementUploaded byMohamed Cheniti
- Mine 395 NotesUploaded bylulu242008
- Probability DistributionsaUploaded byasdasdas asdasdasdsadsasddssa
- QMDM_ProbUploaded bychacha_420
- Schinner-2007-The Voynich Manuscript Evidence of the Hoax Hypothesis-000Uploaded bybobster124u
- chap3.pdfUploaded byIljuha9
- Copula RegressionUploaded byDanna Lesley Cruz Reyes
- Joint Probability FunctionsUploaded byBran Relieve
- Probability summary (Statistics 1)Uploaded byMbusoThabethe
- ProbabilityStat SLIDESUploaded byKlevis Xhyra
- MA1014 Lesson Plan 01Uploaded byPrashanth Vaidya
- Week 07 Flow ChartUploaded byJane Doe
- 1995_BST111+COUNTING+AND+PROBABILITY.pptUploaded bycoleen parayno
- Multivariate Probability Theory - Determination of Probability Density FunctionsUploaded byHugo Hernández
- Lec2_CDFEDFUploaded bySiva Tarun Pikkili
- Introduction to analytics Unit II.pdfUploaded byRamya Reddy
- lect3BinHypergeo.pptUploaded byDEVANSHI MATHUR
- Probability and Statistics.pdfUploaded byAbsolute Zero

- Dislocation Nucleation Governed Softening and MaxiUploaded byHaroon Imtiaz
- The role of antioxidants in photoprotection: A critical reviewUploaded byHaroon Imtiaz
- Master Thesis InterfaceUploaded byHaroon Imtiaz
- Journal of Composite Materials 1971 Tsai 58 80Uploaded byHaroon Imtiaz
- 1982Uploaded byHaroon Imtiaz
- List of PublicationsUploaded byHaroon Imtiaz
- SpringUploaded byLilyz Granger
- Universities 19-4-2012Uploaded byHaroon Imtiaz
- Net Positive Suction Head or NPSHUploaded bysateesh chand
- Metrology - Wikipedia, The Free EncyclopediaUploaded byHaroon Imtiaz

- Analyzing Influence of Socio Demographic Factors on Travel Behavior of Employees a Case Study of Kathmandu Metropolitan City NepalUploaded byIJSTR Research Publication
- Has Social Media Made People More or Less ConnectedUploaded byAnkita Ray
- Chapter 05Uploaded byMrunalini Rane
- Test Method OthersUploaded byEnd End
- 2 Investigating Flame TestsUploaded byMaria Belen Lopez Recalde
- Appraisal theory - map.pdfUploaded byhmercury1
- Nerium Clinical StudyUploaded byNerium Partner
- 10_chapter1.pdfUploaded byKarunesh Mathur
- The Kernighan_Lin AlgorithmUploaded byrounakanchal
- Tcg Sl&Lcca Report May2012 (1)Uploaded byTG Subramanya Prasanna
- Project Guidlines - MAUploaded bymannkv
- 1283 Drajat GeothermalUploaded bySky walking
- A Study on Employee Relationship Management With Special Reference to DDCMPU KrishnagiriUploaded byCHEIF EDITOR
- PHY101Uploaded byDaniel Catolico
- Geological Model SimulationUploaded byYadirita Sanchez Villarreal
- BaP, KanadaUploaded byimasemozese
- 9702_s11_qp_52Uploaded byKai Jie
- Sumatra - Geology, Resources and TectonicsUploaded byErwin Anshari
- cwts_student_module_2.pdfUploaded byDominic Albao
- RobustEstimators-2Uploaded byKoh Siew Kiem
- an action research project on the effects of permanent group seating arrangements onUploaded byapi-284511189
- Graeff_Ch03.pdfUploaded byNazaniah Badrun
- HW7Uploaded byPallavi Raiturkar
- Processing the Chinese Reflexive Ziji Effects of Featural Constraints on Anaphor ResolutionUploaded by51234511
- Cognitive linguistics. Iinternal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction (ed Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, M. Sandra).pdfUploaded byLucía Romero
- MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD OF WEIBULL.docUploaded bybright01
- Practical Research Dr. LimpiadaUploaded byJaycee Aucillo Espinosa
- Reading 1- Academic ReportUploaded bySapna Sharma
- Asme Case 2324Uploaded byDinh Nguyen Gia
- Section 7.2.pdfUploaded byzgmngubane

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.