MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321787386 · doi:10.3390/jrfm16030150

Modelling of Loan Non-Payments with Count Distributions Arising from Non-Exponential Inter-Arrival Times

2023· article· en· W4321787386 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yeh-Ching Low, S. H. Ong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy Prediction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Higher Education, MalaysiaUCSI University
KeywordsRenewal theoryLaplace transformExponential functionEconometricsPaymentExponential distributionContext (archaeology)MathematicsApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationStatisticsComputer scienceMathematical analysisGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of non-payments is an indicator of delinquent behaviour in credit scoring, hence its estimation and prediction are of interest. The modelling of the number of non-payments, as count data, can be examined as a renewal process. In a renewal process, the number of events (such as non-payments) which has occurred up to a fixed time t is intimately connected with the inter-arrival times between the events. In the context of non-payments, the inter-arrival times correspond to the time between two subsequent non-payments. The probability mass function and the renewal function of the count distribution are often complicated, with terms involving factorial and gamma functions, and thus their computation may encounter numerical difficulties. In this paper, with the motivation of modelling the number of non-payments through a renewal process, a general method for computing the probabilities and the renewal function based on numerical Laplace transform inversion is discussed. This method is applied to some count distributions which are derived given the distributions of the inter-arrival times. Parameter estimation with maximum likelihood estimation is considered, with an application to a data set on number of non-payments from the literature.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.516
Threshold uncertainty score0.617

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.187 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy PredictionFrench-language works237,207