MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406040785 · doi:10.62051/7dnjhn18

Research on Financial Loan Default Prediction Based on Multi-Model Ensemble and Custom Thresholds

2024· article· en· W4406040785 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions on Computer Science and Intelligent Systems Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy Prediction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDefaultLoanComputer scienceGradient boostingRandom forestBoosting (machine learning)Machine learningPredictive modellingEnsemble learningArtificial intelligencePrecision and recallStability (learning theory)Ensemble forecastingLogistic regressionFinanceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Loan defaults pose significant threats to financial institutions' financial stability and reputation. Although existing risk assessment models have addressed this issue to some extent, they exhibit significant limitations when dealing with large-scale, high-dimensional data. Therefore, developing an advanced model that can predict loan defaults with higher accuracy is crucial. This paper aims to optimize loan default prediction by combining innovative algorithms and models to enhance the risk management capabilities of financial institutions and reduce economic losses. This study proposes a loan default prediction model based on the LendingClub dataset. The model integrates multiple machine learning algorithms, including Logistic Regression, Random Forest, Gradient Boosting, LightGBM, and CatBoost, as well as ensemble learning methods, aiming to improve the prediction accuracy and stability of the model. Through a comprehensive analysis of the model's precision, recall, and custom evaluation metrics, this paper establishes an optimized comprehensive model, improving recall from 60% to 80% and precision from 28% to 29%. By optimizing thresholds, the model significantly enhances the identification of bad loans while balancing precision and recall, providing an effective solution for loan default prediction.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.235 · 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