MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391611445 · doi:10.1002/for.3074

Two‐stage credit risk prediction framework based on three‐way decisions with automatic threshold learning

2024· article· en· W4391611445 on OpenAlexaff
Yusheng Li, Mengyi Sha

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Forecasting · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy Prediction
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Hebei ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceParticle swarm optimizationMachine learningOptimal decisionBinary decision diagramCredit riskData miningArtificial intelligenceDecision treeFinanceAlgorithmBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Credit risk prediction is a binary classification problem. Using two‐way decisions to classify defaulters may lead to decision errors due to insufficient information. To solve this issue, in addition to identifying borrowers as defaulters and nondefaulters, this paper introduced the delay‐decision mechanism in three‐way decisions, so that records acquiring more information do not make decisions immediately. A two‐stage credit risk prediction framework based on three‐way decisions was proposed to reduce decision risk. In this framework, the decision cost values of three‐way decisions were simplified by analyzing the credit risk prediction, and the expression of threshold calculation was also modified. An optimization objective was built according to the trade‐off between information gain and decision cost, and the particle swarm optimization algorithm was applied to learn the decision thresholds. After adding more supplementary information, the samples in the delayed‐decision region were made further decisions. A dataset from a commercial bank in China was employed to conduct experiments, and the results demonstrated that our proposed method outperformed various base classifiers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ForecastingSame topicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy PredictionFrench-language works237,207