MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206052219 · doi:10.3390/jrfm14100481

A Novel Model Structured on Predictive Churn Methods in a Banking Organization

2021· article· en· W3206052219 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer churn and segmentation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandom forestComputer scienceDecision treeCustomer baseLogistic regressionContext (archaeology)Predictive modellingArtificial neural networkEconometricsBusinessMarketingData miningArtificial intelligenceMachine learningEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A constant in the business world is the frequent movement of customers joining or abandoning companies’ services and products. The customer is one of the company’s most important assets. Reducing the customer abandonment rate has become a matter of survival and, at the same time, the most efficient way to maintain the customer base, since the replacement of dropouts by new customers costs, on average, 40% more. Aiming to mitigate the churn (customer evasion) phenomenon, this study compared predictive models to discover the most efficient method to identify customers who tend to drop out in the context of a banking organization. A literature review of related works on the subject found the neural network, decision tree, random forest and logistic regression models were the most cited, and thus the models were chosen for this work. Quantitative analyses were carried out on a sample of 200,000 credit operations, with 497 explanatory variables. The statistical treatment of the data and the developments of predictive models of churn were performed using the Orange data mining software. The most expressive results were achieved using the random forest model, with an accuracy of 82%.

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.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.241 · 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