MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402919126 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17100432

Financial Distress Prediction in the Nordics: Early Warnings from Machine Learning Models

2024· article· en· W4402919126 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nils-Gunnar Birkeland Abrahamsen, Emil Nylén-Forthun, Mats Møller, Petter Eilif de Lange, Morten Risstad

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy Prediction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsFinancial distressDistressComputer sciencePsychologyArtificial intelligenceMachine learningBusinessFinancial systemClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes an explicable early warning machine learning model for predicting financial distress, which generalizes across listed Nordic corporations. We develop a novel dataset, covering the period from Q1 2001 to Q2 2022, in which we combine idiosyncratic quarterly financial statement data, information from financial markets, and indicators of macroeconomic trends. The preferred LightGBM model, whose features are selected by applying explainable artificial intelligence, outperforms the benchmark models by a notable margin across evaluation metrics. We find that features related to liquidity, solvency, and size are highly important indicators of financial health and thus crucial variables for forecasting financial distress. Furthermore, we show that explicitly accounting for seasonality, in combination with entity, market, and macro information, improves model performance.

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)0.005
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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