MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416592923 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18120662

A Two-Stage Machine Learning Approach to Bankruptcy Prediction: Integrating Full-Feature Modeling and Optimized Feature Selection

2025· article· en· W4416592923 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Masanobu Matsumaru, Hideki Katagiri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy Prediction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeature selectionRandom forestEnsemble learningDecision treeGradient boostingBankruptcy predictionEnsemble forecastingFeature (linguistics)OverfittingSupervised learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Corporate bankruptcy prediction has become increasingly critical amid economic uncertainty. This study proposes a novel two-stage machine learning approach to enhance bankruptcy prediction accuracy, applied to Tokyo Stock Exchange-listed companies. First, models were trained using 173 financial indicators. Second, a wrapper-based feature selection process was employed to reduce dimensionality and eliminate noise, thereby identifying an optimal seven-feature set. Two ensemble learning methods, Random Forest and Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM), were used. Random Forest correctly predicted 566 bankruptcies using the reduced feature set (88 more than when using all features) compared with 451 by LightGBM (31 more than when using all features). LightGBM is a gradient boosting–based ensemble learning method that employs a leaf-wise tree growth strategy, enabling fast computation and high predictive accuracy, especially in large-scale and high-dimensional datasets. The study also addresses challenges posed by imbalanced data by employing resampling techniques (SMOTE, SMOTE-ENN, and KMeans). Additionally, the need for industry-specific modeling is recognized by constructing models for the six industry sectors. These findings highlight the importance of feature selection and ensemble learning for improving model generalizability and uncovering industry-specific patterns. This study contributes to the field of bankruptcy prediction by providing a robust framework for accurate and interpretable predictions for both academic research and practical applications. Future work will focus on further enhancing prediction accuracy to identify more potential bankruptcies.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.748
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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