You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is this something that has any benefit? The main use case I can think of is doing both policy and calendar year aggregations on the same dataframe. But I suppose these aggregations can be done with two dataframes.
Unsure if it is possible to an analysis on both simultaneously (grouping by both policy years and calendar years) because there would be so much truncation.
Is this feature worth the effort and additional complexity?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It might be useful for some folks. I've done an implementation of this in the past. The upside is a single data frame as you said. The downside is that it can lead to confusion or incorrect assumptions about exposures, especially when the decrement of interest is fully exposed.
Let's keep this issue open as something to look at in the future.
Is this something that has any benefit? The main use case I can think of is doing both policy and calendar year aggregations on the same dataframe. But I suppose these aggregations can be done with two dataframes.
Unsure if it is possible to an analysis on both simultaneously (grouping by both policy years and calendar years) because there would be so much truncation.
Is this feature worth the effort and additional complexity?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: