An Enhanced Comparative Assessment of Ensemble Learning for Credit Scoring

IF 2.2 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, CYBERNETICS
Youssef Tounsi, L. Hassouni, H. Anoun
{"title":"An Enhanced Comparative Assessment of Ensemble Learning for Credit Scoring","authors":"Youssef Tounsi, L. Hassouni, H. Anoun","doi":"10.6025/jic/2019/10/1/15-33","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the most important aspects of financial risk is credit risk management. Effective credit rating models are crucial for the credit institution in assessing credit applications, they have been widely studied in the field of statistics and machine learning. Given that small improvements in credit rating systems can generate significant profits, any improvement is of high interest to banks and financial institutions. The ensemble methods are a set of algorithms whose individual decisions are combined to perform classification tasks. In this work, we propose an enhanced experimental comparative study of five ensemble methods associated with seven base classifiers using six public credit scoring datasets. Four popular evaluation metrics, including area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, false positive rate (FPR) and Time taken to build the model, are employed to measure the performance of models. The experimental results and statistical tests show that Pegasos model has a better overall performance than the other methods analyzed her for Boosting and Credal Decision Tree (CDT) model has a better overall performance than the other algorithms in the case of Bagging, Random Subspace, DECORATE and Rotation Forest.","PeriodicalId":45291,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Intelligent Computing and Cybernetics","volume":"2013 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Intelligent Computing and Cybernetics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6025/jic/2019/10/1/15-33","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, CYBERNETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

One of the most important aspects of financial risk is credit risk management. Effective credit rating models are crucial for the credit institution in assessing credit applications, they have been widely studied in the field of statistics and machine learning. Given that small improvements in credit rating systems can generate significant profits, any improvement is of high interest to banks and financial institutions. The ensemble methods are a set of algorithms whose individual decisions are combined to perform classification tasks. In this work, we propose an enhanced experimental comparative study of five ensemble methods associated with seven base classifiers using six public credit scoring datasets. Four popular evaluation metrics, including area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, false positive rate (FPR) and Time taken to build the model, are employed to measure the performance of models. The experimental results and statistical tests show that Pegasos model has a better overall performance than the other methods analyzed her for Boosting and Credal Decision Tree (CDT) model has a better overall performance than the other algorithms in the case of Bagging, Random Subspace, DECORATE and Rotation Forest.
信用评分集成学习的强化比较评估
金融风险最重要的一个方面是信用风险管理。有效的信用评级模型是信用机构评估信用申请的关键,在统计学和机器学习领域得到了广泛的研究。鉴于信用评级体系的微小改进可以产生可观的利润,任何改进都是银行和金融机构的高度兴趣所在。集成方法是一组算法,其单个决策被组合起来执行分类任务。在这项工作中,我们提出了一个增强的实验比较研究,使用六个公共信用评分数据集,与七个基本分类器相关的五种集成方法。采用四种常用的评价指标,包括曲线下面积(AUC)、准确率、假阳性率(FPR)和构建模型所需的时间,来衡量模型的性能。实验结果和统计测试表明,Pegasos模型在Boosting情况下具有较好的综合性能,而Credal Decision Tree (CDT)模型在Bagging、Random Subspace、装饰和Rotation Forest情况下具有较好的综合性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
4.70%
发文量
26
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信