johcarter
johcarter
Example account A6 (see below)
linked to #830
Regarding solution 2. Its been pointed out that using blanket deductible fields (6All) to represent a franchise deductible on a buildings only coverage would be confusing, and it would be...
Its based on the previous step payout (or accumulated step payouts if there are more than 1 ). Here's how it works TIV = 10,000,000 Input Loss = 5,000,000, Franchise...
thanks @narathips I've implemented this and updated policy A6 example in the unit tests as fm59 https://github.com/OasisLMF/ktest/tree/master/ftest/fm59 https://github.com/OasisLMF/ktools/pull/246
issue found with group_id assignment, which is the same regardless of peril correlation groups being specified. separate issue to be raised
- [x] No correlation settings in model settings should assume 1 peril correlation group with 0 correlation factor. Group_ids should be the same per coverage - [x] Same peril correlation...
one outstanding issue is to generate losses as usual when no correlation settings are provided in model_settings. currently the correlations.bin file is required and is preventing the model from running...
All working as expected. To get back to original results, it is necessary to use --hashed-group-id=false to generate group_ids in the old way. PiWind control results will change due to...
LocPerilsCovered (loc) and PolPerilsCovered (acc), are both required fields. There may be difference in the field value for locations belonging to a policy if there are peril exclusions on certain...