Investigation of multilayer perceptron and class imbalance problems for credit rating
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multilayer perceptron (MLP) neural network is widely used in automatic credit scoring systems with high accuracies and efficiencies. However, class imbalance problems severely harm the prediction accuracy, when the number of instances in one class greatly overweighs the other class. In credit scoring datasets, class imbalance problems exist in fault detection models since there are always less unqualified cases than approved applications. In this work, we investigate the affection of different MLP structure to the prediction ability and develop a novel instance selection method to solve class imbalance problems in German credit datasets. We train 34 models 20 times with different initial weights and training instances. Each model has 6 to 39 hidden units in one hidden layer. Our test results prove that the prediction accuracy of the optimized model with our new instance selection methods is 5% higher than the best result reported in the relevant literature of recent years. We also summarize the tendency of scoring accuracy when the numbers of hidden units in MLP increases. The results of this work can be applied not only for credit scoring, but also in other MLP neural network applications, especially when the distribution of instances in a dataset is imbalanced.
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 | 0.013 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".