A Machine Learning Framework towards Bank Telemarketing Prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of machine learning (ML) methods has been widely discussed for over a decade. The search for the optimal model is still a challenge that researchers seek to address. Despite advances in current work that surpass the limitations of previous ones, research still faces new challenges in every field. For the automatic targeting of customers in a banking telemarketing campaign, the use of ML-based approaches in previous work has not been able to show transparency in the processing of heterogeneous data, achieve optimal performance or use minimal resources. In this paper, we introduce a class membership-based (CMB) classifier which is a transparent approach well adapted to heterogeneous data that exploits nominal variables in the decision function. These dummy variables are often either suppressed or coded in an arbitrary way in most works without really evaluating their impact on the final performance of the models. In many cases, their coding either favours or disfavours the learning model performance without necessarily reflecting reality, which leads to over-fitting or decreased performance. In this work, we applied the CMB approach to data from a bank telemarketing campaign to build an optimal model for predicting potential customers before launching a campaign. The results obtained suggest that the CMB approach can predict the success of future prospecting more accurately than previous work. Furthermore, in addition to its better performance in terms of accuracy (97.3%), the model also gives a very close score for the AUC (95.9%), showing its stability, which would be very unfavourable to over-fitting.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".