September 2010

I'm not a retaker but i think it was much more reasonable than the April 2010 paper, but very long. I had to leave out 10 marks worth of Q's. That time series Q was the hardest on the paper i think. It was incredibly easy for that to turn into a complete mess.

The paper is avaliable on the website

http://www.actuaries.org.uk/sites/all/files/documents/pdf/fandict6201009examfinal.pdf

 

the paper was a sitter. really boosted my confidence before CT8 mortally wounded me.

 

tough

I found it hard,

got nothing for Q1.

never really got going on Time Series.

Found Q8 a pain too

I do think I should have coped better having looked again at the paper, but then that's exam pressure for you.

Never mind, on with SA2. I am already back on the horse as I have ordered it already.

 

I still have no idea which topic question 1 came from.

Question 8 was brutal,glad to see i wasnt the only one having a problem with it.
I would probably have tried to navigate through it if it wasnt for time constraints.

tonnes of bookwork questions though.

 

It was a little rough.. I do agree that it was long. Had to strategically pick questions that I knew I could answer and leave out questions that I wasn't too sure on it...

Here's to hoping.

 

P.S. Ques 8 was an old past paper question... A really old one... I didn't remember how to answer it but I tried.

 

What was so bad about Q8? It's a proof directly from the core reading, only the discrete version. There were still 3/10 marks on offer if you didn't know how to do it, but yes leaving this out if you didn't know exactly how to do it was a good idea. Q1 was from the chapter on Monte Carlo methods, very last thing in the notes, I wasn't sure if they were after relative error or absolute error though, I went for absolute error. I still think Q11 was by far the toughest go get out in its entirety..

 

Question 11 was a hard one to get in its entirety,i agree,especially since i was really tired and really running out of time.

 

Reasonable in my view. Much easier than the April exam. Hmm am I spotting a trend here...?

 

Log and Ln (natural log ) dilemna

This paper was definately easier than the April one. Though I agree that last question on time series was a killer...I hope this is the last time I sit for this CT6.

I have one querry though....what is the difference between the natural log (ln) and log? and when do you use it? I got confused in the weibull question. I knew the method but got confused as to whether to punch in ln or log on my calculator. The same applies when I am also working with the lognormal distribution (X-logN) - like converting it to standard normal variables. Do we use log or ln?

Otherwise I have to pass, this was my 3rd sitting and my last CT paper

 

If you do not have a subscript with the log(x) then you treat it as a log of e (x) which is = ln (x)
I always use the ln button on my calculator on the exams as all the logs that I've seen were just log(x) which is = ln(x)

here is a useful link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_log

 

If you hit log on your calculator you will get log base 10. Usually when writing log in a mathematical context it means log base e (also known as ln or 'natural logarithm''). However in alot of sciences (especially chemistry, eg ph scale is a logarithmic scale) log actually means log base 10. This is why to eliminate any confusion ln is usually written. If your solving equations though with logs it doesn't make any difference aslong as you use either log or ln. In stats and most of maths ln is used 99.9999% of the time.

 

Thanks guys for the clarification.

It has always buffled me ,cause i noticed they interchanged it a lot in the past papers I attempted. I ended up using the ln (or was it the log ???? )function but i guess it doesn't matter, provided the methodology is correct , one or two marks is ok to lose

What did you guys think of the runoff table question? This examiners always trying to make us pee on our pants. I must admit it was different and I hate working backwards. It felt more like they were testing our expertise in algebra. But after a lot of sweat I think i got it

 

Lol, the runoff triangle question was easy but as you mention it was more of an attempt to catch people out who just revised past papers rather than taking the time to understand the theory. I hate being put under pressure like that in exams.

 

Best of luck miss vee
It was my first sitting and im hopping for the best,i actually learnt a lot about run off triangles from these boards,especially bornhuetter ferguson which is usually a nightmare for someone who doesnt take time to understand the mechanics of it

Parts of Question 11 and 8 gave me a hard time,hopefully i managed to pick up something from both

 

It was not completely new Mr.Matthews...check out question 4(i) in this paper ...

 

I passsseeddd... Yeahhhh

 

Im glad i passed too.
I was a bit worried having botched the ruin theory question in a major way.

 

CT 6 cleared

Well Cleared CT 6 ..... I had attempted around 84 marks of the paper messing up the Risk Model 2 question pretty badly....Thank god it didnt matter has anyone got an opinion about the papers to pursue after CT 1 3 and 6...