Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Feature contribution alignment with expert knowledge for artificial intelligence credit scoring

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Signal, Image and Video Processing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 27 July 2022

This article has been updated

Abstract

Credit assessments activities are essential for financial institutions and allow the global economy to grow. Building robust, solid and accurate models that estimate the probability of a default of a company is mandatory for credit insurance companies, specially when it comes to bridging the trade finance gap. The recent developments in Artificial Intelligence are offering new powerful opportunities. However, most AI techniques are labeled as black-box models due to their lack of explainability. For both users and regulators, in order to deploy such technologies at scale, being able to understand the model logic is a must to grant accurate and ethical decision making. In this study, we focus on companies credit scoring and we benchmark different machine learning models. The aim is to build a model to predict whether a company will experience financial problems in a given time horizon. We address the black-box problem using eXplainable Artificial Techniques—in particular, post hoc explanations using SHapley Additive exPlanations. We bring light by providing an expert-aligned feature relevance score highlighting the disagreement between a credit risk expert and a model feature attribution explanation in order to better quantify the convergence toward a better human-aligned decision making.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

Notes

  1. https://pandas.pydata.org/.

  2. https://numpy.org/.

  3. https://imbalanced-learn.org/stable/.

  4. https://www.tinubu.com/.

  5. After trying different combinations for both hyperparameters, these values obtain the best results for the tested ML models.

References

  1. Hand, D.J., Henley, W.E.: Statistical classification methods in consumer credit scoring: a review. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. A Stat. Soc. 160(3), 523–541 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Altman, E.I.: Financial ratios, discriminant analysis and the prediction of corporate bankruptcy. J. Financ. 23(4), 589–609 (1968)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Merton, R.C.: On the Pricing of Corporate Debt: the Risk Structure of Interest Rates. J. Financ. 29(2), 449–470 (1974)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Rikkers, F., Thibeault, A: The influence of rating philosophy on regulatory capital and procyclicality. In: European Financial Management Association, Annual Meeting, June 24–28, Athens, Greece. Nyenrode Business Universiteit. 2008

  5. Lessmann, S., et al.: Benchmarking state-of- the-art classification algorithms for credit scoring: an update of research. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 247(1), 124–136 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Lundberg, S.M., Lee, S.-.I.: A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 30 (2017).

  7. Makowski, P.: Credit scoring branches out. Credit World 75(1), 30–37 (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Baesens, B., et al.: Benchmarking state-of-the-art classification algorithms for credit scoring. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 54(6), 627–635 (2003)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Breiman, L.: Random forests. English. Mach. Learn. 45(1), 5–32 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Bussmann, N., et al.: Explainable machine learning in credit risk management. Computat. Econ. (2020)

  11. Chen, T., Guestrin, C.: XGBoost. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (2016)

  12. Chawla, N.V., et al.: SMOTE: synthetic minority over-sampling technique. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 16, 321–357 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.953

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Kuiper, O., et al.: Exploring explainable AI in the financial sector: perspectives of banks and supervisory authorities. In: Benelux Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Springer, pp. 105– 119 (2021)

  14. Guidotti, R., et al.: A survey of methods for explaining black box models. ACM Comput. Surv. (CSUR) 51(5), 1–42 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lundberg, S., Lee, S.- I.: A unified approach to interpreting model predictions (2017)

  16. Demajo, L.M., Vella, V., Dingli, A.: Explainable AI for interpretable credit scoring. In: Computer Science & Information Tech-nology (CS & IT) (2020)

  17. Troyanskaya, O., et al.: Missing value estimation methods for DNA microarrays. Bioinformatics 17, 520–525 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Pedregosa, F., et al.: Scikit-learn: machine learning in python. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12, 2825–2830 (2011)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Trocan.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

El Qadi, A., Trocan, M., Díaz-Rodríguez, N. et al. Feature contribution alignment with expert knowledge for artificial intelligence credit scoring. SIViP 17, 427–434 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11760-022-02239-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11760-022-02239-7

Keywords

Navigation