MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2288917440

Scoring Method for Clients Without Bank References

2013· article· en· W2288917440 on OpenAlexaff
Osvaldo Espin-García, Carlos Vladimir Rodríguez-Caballero

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBalanced scorecardCredit historyCredit referenceActuarial scienceCredit riskPopulationBusinessBank creditCredit enhancementCredit scoreCredit card interestFinanceComputer scienceAccountingMarketing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The credit grant decisions are crucial for risk management. Financial institutions have developed and used credit scoring models for automating and standardizing credit granting. However, in the literature it is not common to find a methodology to be applied to clients without previous credit experience, in other words those who lack information in the national credit bureaus. In this paper a basic methodology to build a scorecard model is presented, considering that the LatinAmerican banks have been incremented the credit policies in favor of this kind of population. We use demographic information for an objective population from a small Mexican bank to illustrate the methodology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.012

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisFrench-language works237,207