MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988130070 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v3n1p22

Modelling Credit Risk for Personal Loans Using Product-Limit Estimator

2012· article· en· W1988130070 on OpenAlex
Okumu Argan Wekesa, Mwalili Samuel, Mwita Peter

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy Prediction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaymentLoanEstimatorActuarial scienceProduct (mathematics)HazardLimit (mathematics)EconomicsSample (material)Kaplan–Meier estimatorEconometricsBusinessStatisticsMathematicsFinancePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A product- limit approach was adopted to estimate time to default for male and female loan applicants. For each group, a sample of 250 applicants was observed for a 30 months. The life of the account is measured from the month it was opened until the account becomes ‘bad’ or it is closed or until the end of observation. The account is considered bad if payment is not made for two consecutive months in line with the industry practice. If the account does not miss two payments and is closed or survives beyond the observation period, it is considered to be censored. The results showed that there is no significant difference between male and female applicants in terms of their survival times and hazard rates.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.637
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.241 · 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