On the dynamics of credit history and social interaction features, and their impact on creditworthiness assessment performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For more than a half-century, credit risk management has used credit scoring models in each of its well-defined stages to manage credit risk. Application scoring is used to decide whether to grant a credit or not, while behavioral scoring is used mainly for portfolio management and to take preventive actions in case of default signals. In both cases, network data has recently been shown to be valuable to increase the predictive power of these models, especially when the borrower's historical data is scarce or not available. This study aims to understand the creditworthiness assessment performance dynamics and how it is influenced by the credit history, repayment behavior, and social network features. To accomplish this, we introduced a machine learning classification framework to analyze 97.000 individuals and companies from the moment they obtained their first loan to 12 months afterward. Our novel and massive dataset allow us to characterize each borrower according to their credit behavior, and social and economic relationships. Our research shows that borrowers' history increases performance at a decreasing rate during the first six months and then stabilizes. The most notable effect on perfomance of social networks features occurs at loan application; in personal scoring, this effect prevails a few months, while in business scoring adds value throughout the study period. These findings are of great value to improve credit risk management and optimize the use of traditional information and alternative data sources.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".