Credit risk assessment: Evidence from banking industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Measuring different risk factors such as credit risk in banking industry has been an interesting area of studies.The artificial neural network is a nonparametric method developed to succeed for measuring credit risk and this method is applied to measure the credit risk.This research's neural network follows back propagation paradigm, which enables it to use historical data for predicting future values with very good out of sample fitting.Macroeconomic variables including GDP, exchange rate, inflation rate, stock price index, and M2 are used to forecast credit risk for two Iranian banks; namely Saderat and Sarmayeh over the period 2007-2011.Research data are being tested for ADF and Causality Granger tests before entering the ANN to achieve the best lag structure for the research model.MSE and R values for the developed ANN in this research respectively are 86 × 10 and 0.9885, respectively.The results showed that ANN was able to predict banks' credit risk with low error.Sensibility analyses which has accomplished on this research's ANN corroborates that M2 has the highest effect on the ANN's credit risk and should be considered as an additional leading indicator by Iran's banking authorities.These matters confirm validation of macroeconomic notions in Iran's credit systematic risk.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".