IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2510.22518.html

Inverse Behavioral Optimization of QALY-Based Incentive Systems Quantifying the System Impact of Adaptive Health Programs

Author

Listed:
  • Jinho Cha
  • Justin Yu
  • Junyeol Ryu
  • Eunchan Daniel Cha
  • Hyeyoung Hwang

Abstract

This study introduces an inverse behavioral optimization framework that integrates QALY-based health outcomes, ROI-driven incentives, and adaptive behavioral learning to quantify how policy design shapes national healthcare performance. Building on the FOSSIL (Flexible Optimization via Sample-Sensitive Importance Learning) paradigm, the model embeds a regret-minimizing behavioral weighting mechanism that enables dynamic learning from heterogeneous policy environments. It recovers latent behavioral sensitivities (efficiency, fairness, and temporal responsiveness T) from observed QALY-ROI trade-offs, providing an analytical bridge between individual incentive responses and aggregate system productivity. We formalize this mapping through the proposed System Impact Index (SII), which links behavioral elasticity to measurable macro-level efficiency and equity outcomes. Using OECD-WHO panel data, the framework empirically demonstrates that modern health systems operate near an efficiency-saturated frontier, where incremental fairness adjustments yield stabilizing but diminishing returns. Simulation and sensitivity analyses further show how small changes in behavioral parameters propagate into measurable shifts in systemic resilience, equity, and ROI efficiency. The results establish a quantitative foundation for designing adaptive, data-driven health incentive programs that dynamically balance efficiency, fairness, and long-run sustainability in national healthcare systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Jinho Cha & Justin Yu & Junyeol Ryu & Eunchan Daniel Cha & Hyeyoung Hwang, 2025. "Inverse Behavioral Optimization of QALY-Based Incentive Systems Quantifying the System Impact of Adaptive Health Programs," Papers 2510.22518, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2510.22518
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2510.22518
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Machina, Mark J, 1987. "Choice under Uncertainty: Problems Solved and Unsolved," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 121-154, Summer.
    2. Jinho Cha & Eunchan D. Cha & Emily Yoo & Hyoshin Song, 2025. "Modeling ROI in Chronic Disease Management, A Simulation-Based Framework Integrating Patient Adherence and Policy Timing," Papers 2510.06379, arXiv.org.
    3. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Basieva, Irina & Khrennikova, Polina & Pothos, Emmanuel M. & Asano, Masanari & Khrennikov, Andrei, 2018. "Quantum-like model of subjective expected utility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 150-162.
    2. Kontek, Krzysztof, 2015. "Fanning-Out or Fanning-In? Continuous or Discontinuous? Estimating Indifference Curves Inside the Marschak-Machina Triangle using Certainty Equivalents," MPRA Paper 63965, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Zvi Safra & Uzi Segal, 2005. "Are Universal Preferences Possible? Calibration Results for Non-Expected Utility Theories," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 633, Boston College Department of Economics.
    4. Haven, Emmanuel & Khrennikova, Polina, 2018. "A quantum-probabilistic paradigm: Non-consequential reasoning and state dependence in investment choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 186-197.
    5. Kobi Kriesler & Shmuel Nitzan, 2009. "Framing-based Choice: A Model of Decision-making Under Risk," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 25, pages 65-89.
    6. Louis Lévy-Garboua, 1999. "Expected Utility and Cognitive Consistency," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-03674666, HAL.
    7. Peter Brooks & Simon Peters & Horst Zank, 2014. "Risk behavior for gain, loss, and mixed prospects," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(2), pages 153-182, August.
    8. Helga Fehr-Duda & Thomas Epper, 2012. "Probability and Risk: Foundations and Economic Implications of Probability-Dependent Risk Preferences," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 4(1), pages 567-593, July.
    9. Simone Cerreia‐Vioglio & David Dillenberger & Pietro Ortoleva, 2015. "Cautious Expected Utility and the Certainty Effect," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 693-728, March.
    10. Peiqiu Guan & Jing Zhang & Vineet M. Payyappalli & Jun Zhuang, 2018. "Modeling and Validating Public–Private Partnerships in Disaster Management," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 55-71, June.
    11. William Harbaugh & Kate Krause & Lise Vesterlund, 2002. "Risk Attitudes of Children and Adults: Choices Over Small and Large Probability Gains and Losses," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(1), pages 53-84, June.
    12. Daniel Gregg & John Rolfe, 2017. "Risk Behaviours and Grazing Land Management: A Framed Field Experiment and Linkages to Range Land Condition," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(3), pages 682-709, September.
    13. John A. Doukas & Wenjia Zhang, 2013. "Managerial gambling attitudes: evidence from bank acquisitions," Review of Behavioral Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 5(1), pages 4-34, September.
    14. Marek Jenöffy-Lochau, 2023. "Preference Formation and Economic Theory," Working Papers hal-04139498, HAL.
    15. George Wu & Alex B. Markle, 2008. "An Empirical Test of Gain-Loss Separability in Prospect Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(7), pages 1322-1335, July.
    16. Yves Alarie & Georges Dionne, 2004. "On the Necessity of Using Lottery Qualities," Cahiers de recherche 0415, CIRPEE.
    17. Yves Alarie & Georges Dionne, 2006. "Lottery qualities," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 195-216, May.
    18. Moshe Levy, 2025. "Relative risk aversion must be close to 1," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 346(1), pages 127-135, March.
    19. Moshe Levy, 2022. "An evolutionary explanation of the Allais paradox," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 1545-1574, November.
    20. Harless, David W & Camerer, Colin F, 1994. "The Predictive Utility of Generalized Expected Utility Theories," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1251-1289, November.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2510.22518. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.