A Comparison of Jordanian Bankruptcy Models: Multilayer Perceptron Neural Network and Discriminant Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main purpose of this study is to develop and compare the classification accuracy of bankruptcy prediction models using the multilayer perceptron neural network, and discriminant analysis, for the industrial sector in Jordan. The models were developed using the ten popular financial ratios found to be useful in earlier studies and expected to predict bankruptcy. The study sample was divided into two samples; the original sample (n=14) for developing the two models and a hold-out sample (n=18) for testing the prediction of models for three years prior to bankruptcy during the period from 2000 to 2014. The results indicated that there was a difference in prediction accuracy between models in two and three years prior to failure. The results indicated that the multilayer perceptron neural network model achieved a higher overall classification accuracy rate for all three years prior to bankruptcy than the discriminant analysis model. Furthermore, the prediction rate was 94.44% two years prior to bankruptcy using multilayer perceptron neural network model and 72.22% using the discriminant analysis model. This is a significant difference of 22.22%. On the other side, the prediction rate of 83.34% three years prior to bankruptcy using multilayer perceptron neural network model and 61.11% using discriminant analysis model. We indicate there was a difference exists of 22.23%. In addition, the multilayer perceptron neural network model provides in the first two years prior to bankruptcy the lowest percentage of type I error.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".