MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516183197 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v8n9p69

The Risk Management of Commercial Banks——Credit-Risk Assessment of Enterprises

2016· article· en· W2516183197 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Na Luo, Jiayi Yang, Yuanfeng Zhu, Yu Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy Prediction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCredit riskBusinessSample (material)Risk managementRisk assessmentCredit historyQuality (philosophy)Credit ratingCredit referenceFinancial risk managementActuarial scienceCredit enhancementFinanceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the diversified developments of the financial market, commercial banks are confronted with various risks, among which the credit risk is the core, and thus the assessment of enterprises’ credit risks is especially important in the credit process of the commercial banks. Based on the relevant researches about commercial banks’ credit risk management, the paper carries out a deep analysis on the factors that may affect the credit risk assessment and then establishes a relatively comprehensive credit risk assessment system. In this paper, we apply our risk assessment model, which is established on the basis of GRNN neural network model, to make an empirical analysis with the selected sample data. And the results suggest that the hit rates of identifying high quality enterprises and low quality enterprises are 92.16 percent and 93.75 percent, respectively, indicating that the model has realized a good prediction.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy PredictionFrench-language works237,207