Asset Quality as a Predictor of Rural Bank Bankruptcy in Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study aims to form a bankruptcy prediction model of rural bank in Indonesia at a time variation of 1 quarter (MP1), 2 quarters (MP2), 4 quarters (MP4), and 8 quarters (MP8) before bankruptcy. The quality of productive assets as a predictor variable consist of CEA, CEAEA, and NPL. The condition of rural bank bankrupt and non bankrupt as a dependent variable. The analytical method used is logistic regression followed by testing the model accuration. The population of this study is rural bank in Indonesia. The sample used was 241 rural banks that consist of 41 bankrupt rural banks and 200 non bankrupt rural banks. The data used are the quarterly financial statements of 2006 to 2019. The study result showed that of the four prediction models that successfully built, the 1 quarter (MP1) is the most feasible and accurate used as bankruptcy prediction model of rural banks in Indonesia that formed by CEAEA and NPL ratio. The MP1 has a classification accuracy of 93,8% at the level of modelling with cut off point of 0,29 and it has a classification accuracy of 83,93% at the level of validation with cut off point of 0,12. Based on those advantage, the MP1 was chosen as a model that able to predict the bankruptcy of rural bank in Indonesia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".