一种新的信用模型风险度量:数据越多,模型风险越低吗?

IF 2.9 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Valter T. Yoshida Junior , Rafael Schiozer , Alan de Genaro , Toni R.E. dos Santos
{"title":"一种新的信用模型风险度量:数据越多,模型风险越低吗?","authors":"Valter T. Yoshida Junior ,&nbsp;Rafael Schiozer ,&nbsp;Alan de Genaro ,&nbsp;Toni R.E. dos Santos","doi":"10.1016/j.qref.2025.101960","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Large databases and Machine Learning enhance our capacity to develop models with many observations and explanatory variables. While the literature has primarily focused on optimizing classifications, little attention has been given to model risk, especially originating from inadequate use. To address this gap, we introduce a new metric for assessing model risk in credit applications. We test the metric using cross-section LASSO default models, each incorporating 200 thousand loan observations from several banks and more than 100 explanatory variables. The results indicate that models that use loans from a single bank have lower model risk than models using loans from the entire financial system. Therefore, adding loans from different banks to increase the number of observations in a model is suboptimal, challenging the widely accepted assumption that more data leads to better predictions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47962,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance","volume":"100 ","pages":"Article 101960"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A novel credit model risk measure: Do more data lead to lower model risk?\",\"authors\":\"Valter T. Yoshida Junior ,&nbsp;Rafael Schiozer ,&nbsp;Alan de Genaro ,&nbsp;Toni R.E. dos Santos\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.qref.2025.101960\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Large databases and Machine Learning enhance our capacity to develop models with many observations and explanatory variables. While the literature has primarily focused on optimizing classifications, little attention has been given to model risk, especially originating from inadequate use. To address this gap, we introduce a new metric for assessing model risk in credit applications. We test the metric using cross-section LASSO default models, each incorporating 200 thousand loan observations from several banks and more than 100 explanatory variables. The results indicate that models that use loans from a single bank have lower model risk than models using loans from the entire financial system. Therefore, adding loans from different banks to increase the number of observations in a model is suboptimal, challenging the widely accepted assumption that more data leads to better predictions.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47962,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance\",\"volume\":\"100 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101960\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1062976925000018\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1062976925000018","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大型数据库和机器学习增强了我们开发具有许多观察和解释变量的模型的能力。虽然文献主要集中在优化分类上,但很少关注模型风险,特别是由于使用不足而引起的风险。为了解决这一差距,我们引入了一个新的指标来评估信贷应用中的模型风险。我们使用横截面LASSO默认模型来测试度量,每个模型都包含来自几家银行的20万笔贷款观察和100多个解释变量。结果表明,使用单个银行贷款的模型比使用整个金融系统贷款的模型风险更低。因此,增加来自不同银行的贷款来增加模型中的观察数量是次优的,这挑战了广泛接受的假设,即更多的数据导致更好的预测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A novel credit model risk measure: Do more data lead to lower model risk?
Large databases and Machine Learning enhance our capacity to develop models with many observations and explanatory variables. While the literature has primarily focused on optimizing classifications, little attention has been given to model risk, especially originating from inadequate use. To address this gap, we introduce a new metric for assessing model risk in credit applications. We test the metric using cross-section LASSO default models, each incorporating 200 thousand loan observations from several banks and more than 100 explanatory variables. The results indicate that models that use loans from a single bank have lower model risk than models using loans from the entire financial system. Therefore, adding loans from different banks to increase the number of observations in a model is suboptimal, challenging the widely accepted assumption that more data leads to better predictions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
2.90%
发文量
118
期刊介绍: The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance (QREF) attracts and publishes high quality manuscripts that cover topics in the areas of economics, financial economics and finance. The subject matter may be theoretical, empirical or policy related. Emphasis is placed on quality, originality, clear arguments, persuasive evidence, intelligent analysis and clear writing. At least one Special Issue is published per year. These issues have guest editors, are devoted to a single theme and the papers have well known authors. In addition we pride ourselves in being able to provide three to four article "Focus" sections in most of our issues.
×
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