MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004823800 · doi:10.6000/1929-7092.2020.09.04

Transformation of the Forecast Assessment of Expected Credit Losses in Monitoring and Assessment of Credit Risk in Commercial Banks

2020· article· en· W3004823800 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elena V. Travkina, Yuliya N. Solnyshkova, Oksana A. Kazankina, Elena G. Azmanova, Yuliya V. Morozova

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reviews on Global Economics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEconomic and Technological Developments in Russia
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformation (genetics)Credit riskBusinessRisk assessmentActuarial scienceEconometricsEconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article presents the results of the systematization of issues arising in connection with the transformation of the banks forecast assessment of expected credit losses during the monitoring and evaluation of credit risk in commercial banks. Based on the data obtained on the introduction of IFRS 9 "Financial instruments" into the banking sector, it is concluded that in banking practice there is uncertainty regarding the long-term impact of credit risk, and there are significant difficulties with the use of a large amount of additional information, which creates certain difficulties in calculating future credit losses of banks. It is noted that the current use of the model of predictive assessment of expected credit losses of customers in the monitoring and evaluation of credit risk in the bank should take into account the selected collective or individual basis of assessment. The article presents a comprehensive approach to the use of the impairment model of expected losses in banking as a basic tool for modeling expected credit losses in order to form provisions for impairment with the allocation. The modification of this model will depend on the specifics of the bank's credit activities and portfolio, the types of its financial instruments, the sources of available information, as well as the IT systems used. Validation of this model will reduce the expected credit losses, reduce the amount of estimated reserves, as well as improve the efficiency of the Bank as a whole.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reviews on Global EconomicsSame topicEconomic and Technological Developments in RussiaFrench-language works237,207