Bankruptcy Prediction Using Support Vector Machines and Feature Selection During the Recent Financial Crisis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims at identifying an optimal set of features for predicting firms bankruptcy events in the current macroeconomic context. To this aim, among many financial features, we propose new country-specific factors which consider the macroeconomic conditions of the countries where firms operate. Our forecasting model is based on Support Vector Machines (SVMs), which are tools employed in supervised learning. Firstly, starting from a wide set of variables commonly used for bankruptcy prediction we assess the general effectiveness of SVMs also in comparison with the performances of other commonly used methods. Secondly, we try to improve the accuracy of forecasts by selecting optimal subsets of variables through a feature selection method. The results show that, in the current socio-economic context, the conjunct use of SVMs and the proposed feature selection technique significantly improves the accuracy of bankruptcy predictions compared to the performance of the other methods examined. Furthermore, we show that the proposed country-specific factors are relevant information for predicting the failure of firms and that most of the ratios proposed by Altman in 1968 are still relevant nowadays.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".