Enhancing banking governance: A machine learning-based credit risk classification
Abstract
Risk management in the banking sector has gained heightened significance following the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. With the advent of Machine Learning (ML) techniques, financial institutions are increasingly turning to Artificial Intelligence (AI) for enhanced risk assessment and management. This paper introduces a systematic protocol for implementing a decision tree classifier tailored for credit risk classification. Additionally, we develop a user-friendly web application utilizing the Flask framework and Python Pickle library. This application offers customers an intuitive interface to input their attributes and receive predictions regarding their credit risk classification. Our empirical findings demonstrate that the Support Vector Machine (SVM) achieves a commendable accuracy of 77% in classifying customers based on their banking data. Furthermore, the web application proves to be an effective means for customers to interact with the ML model, enhancing accessibility and user engagement. These outcomes underscore the substantial benefits that ML techniques can bring to the banking industry, enabling improved risk detection and management while concurrently enhancing customer service delivery.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
1. Habehh H, Gohel S. Machine Learning in Healthcare. Current Genomics. 2021; 22(4): 291-300. doi: 10.2174/1389202922666210705124359
2. Javaid M, Haleem A, Pratap Singh R, et al. Significance of machine learning in healthcare: Features, pillars and applications. International Journal of Intelligent Networks. 2022; 3: 58-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ijin.2022.05.002
3. Weissler EH, Naumann T, Andersson T, et al. The role of machine learning in clinical research: transforming the future of evidence generation. Trials. 2021; 22(1). doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05489-x
4. Tirkolaee EB, Sadeghi S, Mooseloo FM, et al. Application of Machine Learning in Supply Chain Management: A Comprehensive Overview of the Main Areas. Mathematical Problems in Engineering. 2021; 2021: 1-14. doi: 10.1155/2021/1476043
5. Yang M, Lim MK, Qu Y, et al. Supply chain risk management with machine learning technology: A literature review and future research directions. Computers & Industrial Engineering. 2023; 175: 108859. doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2022.108859
6. Lagasio V, Pampurini F, Pezzola A, et al. Assessing bank default determinants via machine learning. Information Sciences. 2022; 618: 87-97. doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2022.10.128
7. Boukherouaa EB, AlAjmi K, Deodoro J, et al. Powering the Digital Economy: Opportunities and Risks of Artificial Intelligence in Finance. Departmental Papers. 2021. doi: 10.5089/9781589063952.087.A001
8. Härle P, Havas A, Samandari H. The future of bank risk management McKinsey Working Papers on Risk. McKinsey & Company. 2015. Available online: https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/risk/our-insights/the-future-of-bank-risk-management (accessed on 15 January 2024).
9. Milojević N, Redzepagic S. Prospects of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Application in Banking Risk Management. Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice. 2021; 10(3): 41-57. doi: 10.2478/jcbtp-2021-0023
10. van Liebergen B. Machine learning: A revolution in risk management and compliance? Journal of Financial Transformation. 2017; 45: 60-67.
11. Aziz S, Dowling MM. AI and Machine Learning for Risk Management. SSRN Electronic Journal. 2018. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3201337
12. Bussmann N, Giudici P, Marinelli D, et al. Explainable Machine Learning in Credit Risk Management. Computational Economics. 2020; 57(1): 203-216. doi: 10.1007/s10614-020-10042-0
13. Alonso A, Carbo JM. Machine Learning in Credit Risk: Measuring the Dilemma Between Prediction and Supervisory Cost. SSRN Electronic Journal. 2020. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3724374
14. Alexander C, Sheedy E. Developing a stress testing framework based on market risk models. Journal of Banking & Finance. 2008; 32(10): 2220-2236. doi: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2007.12.041
15. Vasilopoulos C. Financial Stress Testing: A model based exploration under deep uncertainty. 2013.
16. Leo M, Sharma S, Maddulety K. Machine Learning in Banking Risk Management: A Literature Review. Risks. 2019; 7(1): 29. doi: 10.3390/risks7010029
17. Pathan S, Faff R. Does board structure in banks really affect their performance? Journal of Banking & Finance. 2013; 37(5): 1573-1589. doi: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2012.12.016
18. Adams RB, Mehran H. Bank board structure and performance: Evidence for large bank holding companies. Journal of Financial Intermediation. 2012; 21(2): 243-267. doi: 10.1016/j.jfi.2011.09.002
19. Bossu W, Liu Y, Rossi ADP, et al. The Impact of Fintech on Central Bank Governance. FinTech Notes. 2021; 2021(001): 1. doi: 10.5089/9781513592473.063
20. Loan prediction problem dataset. Available online: https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/altruistdelhite04/loan-prediction-problem-dataset (accessed on 15 January 2024).
21. Lagani V, Karozou AD, Gomez-Cabrero D, et al. A comparative evaluation of data-merging and meta-analysis methods for reconstructing gene-gene interactions. BMC Bioinformatics. 2016; 17(S5). doi: 10.1186/s12859-016-1038-1
22. Roy B. All About Missing Data Handling. Medium. 2023. Available online: https://towardsdatascience.com/all-about-missing-data-handling-b94b8b5d2184 (accessed on 5 February 2023).
23. Missingness - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/mathematics/missingness (accessed on 5 February 2023).
24. Badr W. Having an Imbalanced Dataset? Here Is How You Can Fix It. Medium. 2020. Available online: https://towardsdatascience.com/having-an-imbalanced-dataset-here-is-how-you-can-solve-it-1640568947eb (accessed on 6 February 2023).
25. Bach M, Werner A, Palt M. The Proposal of Undersampling Method for Learning from Imbalanced Datasets. Procedia Computer Science. 2019; 159: 125-134. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.167
26. Mohammed R, Rawashdeh J, Abdullah M. Machine Learning with Oversampling and Undersampling Techniques: Overview Study and Experimental Results. 2020 11th International Conference on Information and Communication Systems (ICICS); April 2020. doi: 10.1109/icics49469.2020.239556
27. Joseph VR, Vakayil A. SPlit: An Optimal Method for Data Splitting. Technometrics. 2021; 64(2): 166-176. doi: 10.1080/00401706.2021.1921037
28. Rokach L, Maimon O. Decision Trees. In: Maimon O, Rokach L (editors). Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery Handbook. Springer US, Boston, MA; 2005. pp. 165-192. doi: 10.1007/0-387-25465-X_9
29. Oetama RS. Enhancing Decision Tree Performance in Credit Risk Classification and Prediction. Ultimatics : Jurnal Teknik Informatika. 2015; 7(1). doi: 10.31937/ti.v7i1.349
30. Charbuty B, Abdulazeez A. Classification Based on Decision Tree Algorithm for Machine Learning. Journal of Applied Science and Technology Trends. 2021; 2(01): 20-28. doi: 10.38094/jastt20165
31. Hemanth J, Fernando X, Lafata P, et al. International Conference on Intelligent Data Communication Technologies and Internet of Things (ICICI) 2018. Springer International Publishing; 2019. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-03146-6
32. Schölkopf B, Luo Z, Vovk V, et al. Empirical Inference. Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2013. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-41136-6
33. Taunk K, De S, Verma S, et al. A Brief Review of Nearest Neighbor Algorithm for Learning and Classification. 2019 International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control Systems (ICCS); May 2019. doi: 10.1109/iccs45141.2019.9065747
34. Welcome to Flask - Flask Documentation (2.2.x). Available online: https://flask.palletsprojects.com/en/2.2.x/ (accessed on 15 February 2023).
35. pickle - Python object serialization. In: Python documentation. Available online: https://docs.python.org/3/library/pickle.html (accessed on 15 February 2023).
36. Moumane K, Idri A. Software quality in mobile environments: A comparative study. In 2017 4th International Conference on Control, Decision and Information Technologies (CoDIT) (pp. 1123–1128). IEEE. 2017.
37. Moumane K, Idri A, Abran A. Usability evaluation of mobile applications using ISO 9241 and ISO 25062 standards. SpringerPlus. 2016; 5: 548.
38. Moumane K, Idri A. Using ISO 9126 with QoS DiffServ model for evaluating software quality in mobile environments. In 2014 Second World Conference on Complex Systems (WCCS) (pp. 134–139). IEEE. 2014.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.32629/jai.v7i5.1544
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2024 Karima Moumane, Ikram El Asri, Ilham Rharoubi, Hafida Ait Abderrahman, Sara Faqihi
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/