MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Credit risk assessment in the microfinance industry

2011· article· en· W1926970334 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEconomics of Transition · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMicrofinance and Financial Inclusion
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrofinanceOutreachCredit riskCorporate governanceConstructiveRisk managementMargin (machine learning)BusinessEconomicsFinancial risk managementActuarial scienceControl (management)AccountingFinancial systemFinanceEconomic growthProcess (computing)Management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper discusses credit risk assessment through conventional and specialized credit evaluation metrics. I find that low credit risk is a direct consequence of sound implementation of good governance practices and sustainable financial performance through sound qualitative and quantitative risk management tools. Furthermore, I find that the depth and breadth of outreach and write‐off are by some margin the two most important determinant indicators of a microfinance institutions’ (MFI’s) credit risk control. In addition, I demonstrate that there is no significant statistical difference in terms of risk management among the different types of MFIs. Results also suggest that constructive regulation to promote MFIs has a non‐negligible impact on the risk assessment of MFIs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.592
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.182 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it