SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Kevin Casey

Publications and source records attributed to Kevin Casey.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Underwriting the Agent Economy: The Blueprint for an AI Insurance Stack

From maritime trade to commercial nuclear power, insurance has been the enabler of major economic and technological developments by pricing risk, limiting downside, and spreading best practices. The emerging AI agent economy, projected to handle trillions of dollars in transactions by 2030, looks to be the next such development. Yet insurers' exposure to AI agent risk currently sits largely unpriced across existing insurance lines; between this silent coverage and growing exclusions, coverage is not fit for purpose. Furthermore, insurability is trending the wrong way: AI agent capabilities appear to be outpacing reliability, leading to rising incident severity; concentration among a few foundation model providers threatens correlated losses; and traditional actuarial modeling will struggle to keep pace with a technology evolving as rapidly as frontier AI. This report argues that affirmative AI coverage with limits in the billions is achievable by 2030, but only with industry-wide coordination. Drawing on successful historical precedents such as Underwriters Laboratories, the Closed Claims Project, and others, we lay out an eight-component AI insurance stack spanning incident data collection, catastrophe modeling, standards, contract design, risk selection, pricing, monitoring, and claims management. Building out this infrastructure is what will enable insurers to cover and manage AI agent risk sustainably and at scale. Finally, we discuss coverage for catastrophic risk from frontier AI ("AI CAT"), including CBRN, critical infrastructure collapse, and loss of control scenarios. Addressing these tail risks will require purpose-built instruments, potentially including a frontier model developer mutual, catastrophe bonds, bespoke liability regimes, and government backstops.

cs.CY

Repositioning Tiered HotSpot Execution Performance Relative to the Interpreter

Although the advantages of just-in-time compilation over traditional interpretive execution are widely recognised, there needs to be more current research investigating and repositioning the performance differences between these two execution models relative to contemporary workloads. Specifically, there is a need to examine the performance differences between Java Runtime Environment (JRE) Java Virtual Machine (JVM) tiered execution and JRE JVM interpretive execution relative to modern multicore architectures and modern concurrent and parallel benchmark workloads. This article aims to fill this research gap by presenting the results of a study that compares the performance of these two execution models under load from the Renaissance Benchmark Suite. This research is relevant to anyone interested in understanding the performance differences between just-in-time compiled code and interpretive execution. It provides a contemporary assessment of the interpretive JVM core, the entry and starting point for bytecode execution, relative to just-in-time tiered execution. The study considers factors such as the JRE version, the GNU GCC version used in the JRE build toolchain, and the garbage collector algorithm specified at runtime, and their impact on the performance difference envelope between interpretive and tiered execution. Our findings indicate that tiered execution is considerably more efficient than interpretive execution, and the performance gap has increased, ranging from 4 to 37 times more efficient. On average, tiered execution is approximately 15 times more efficient than interpretive execution. Additionally, the performance differences between interpretive and tiered execution are influenced by workload category, with narrower performance differences observed for web-based workloads and more significant differences for Functional and Scala-type workloads.

cs.PL