IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2209.07574.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Towards a Better Microcredit Decision

Author

Listed:
  • Mengnan Song
  • Jiasong Wang
  • Suisui Su

Abstract

Reject inference comprises techniques to infer the possible repayment behavior of rejected cases. In this paper, we model credit in a brand new view by capturing the sequential pattern of interactions among multiple stages of loan business to make better use of the underlying causal relationship. Specifically, we first define 3 stages with sequential dependence throughout the loan process including credit granting(AR), withdrawal application(WS) and repayment commitment(GB) and integrate them into a multi-task architecture. Inside stages, an intra-stage multi-task classification is built to meet different business goals. Then we design an Information Corridor to express sequential dependence, leveraging the interaction information between customer and platform from former stages via a hierarchical attention module controlling the content and size of the information channel. In addition, semi-supervised loss is introduced to deal with the unobserved instances. The proposed multi-stage interaction sequence(MSIS) method is simple yet effective and experimental results on a real data set from a top loan platform in China show the ability to remedy the population bias and improve model generalization ability.

Suggested Citation

  • Mengnan Song & Jiasong Wang & Suisui Su, 2022. "Towards a Better Microcredit Decision," Papers 2209.07574, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2209.07574
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2209.07574
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patrick Puhani, 2000. "The Heckman Correction for Sample Selection and Its Critique," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(1), pages 53-68, February.
    2. Ha-Thu Nguyen, 2016. "Reject inference in application scorecards: evidence from France," EconomiX Working Papers 2016-10, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    3. Nikita Kozodoi & Panagiotis Katsas & Stefan Lessmann & Luis Moreira-Matias & Konstantinos Papakonstantinou, 2019. "Shallow Self-Learning for Reject Inference in Credit Scoring," Papers 1909.06108, arXiv.org.
    4. G G Chen & T Åstebro, 2012. "Bound and collapse Bayesian reject inference for credit scoring," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 63(10), pages 1374-1387, October.
    5. Banasik, John & Crook, Jonathan, 2007. "Reject inference, augmentation, and sample selection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 183(3), pages 1582-1594, December.
    6. J Banasik & J Crook & L Thomas, 2003. "Sample selection bias in credit scoring models," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(8), pages 822-832, August.
    7. A.J. Feelders, 2000. "Credit scoring and reject inference with mixture models," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(1), pages 1-8, March.
    8. Crook, Jonathan & Banasik, John, 2004. "Does reject inference really improve the performance of application scoring models?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 857-874, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ha Thu Nguyen, 2016. "Reject inference in application scorecards: evidence from France," Working Papers hal-04141601, HAL.
    2. Rogelio A. Mancisidor & Michael Kampffmeyer & Kjersti Aas & Robert Jenssen, 2019. "Deep Generative Models for Reject Inference in Credit Scoring," Papers 1904.11376, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2021.
    3. Ha-Thu Nguyen, 2016. "Reject inference in application scorecards: evidence from France," EconomiX Working Papers 2016-10, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    4. Qiang Liu & Yingtao Luo & Shu Wu & Zhen Zhang & Xiangnan Yue & Hong Jin & Liang Wang, 2022. "RMT-Net: Reject-aware Multi-Task Network for Modeling Missing-not-at-random Data in Financial Credit Scoring," Papers 2206.00568, arXiv.org.
    5. Monir El Annas & Badreddine Benyacoub & Mohamed Ouzineb, 2023. "Semi-supervised adapted HMMs for P2P credit scoring systems with reject inference," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 149-169, March.
    6. Zhiyong Li & Xinyi Hu & Ke Li & Fanyin Zhou & Feng Shen, 2020. "Inferring the outcomes of rejected loans: an application of semisupervised clustering," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(2), pages 631-654, February.
    7. J Banasik & J Crook, 2010. "Reject inference in survival analysis by augmentation," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(3), pages 473-485, March.
    8. Thi Mai Luong, 2020. "Selection Effects of Lender and Borrower Choices on Risk Measurement, Management and Prudential Regulation," PhD Thesis, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney, number 3-2020.
    9. Y Kim & S Y Sohn, 2007. "Technology scoring model considering rejected applicants and effect of reject inference," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(10), pages 1341-1347, October.
    10. Hussein A. Abdou & John Pointon, 2011. "Credit Scoring, Statistical Techniques And Evaluation Criteria: A Review Of The Literature," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(2-3), pages 59-88, April.
    11. Banasik, John & Crook, Jonathan, 2007. "Reject inference, augmentation, and sample selection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 183(3), pages 1582-1594, December.
    12. Crook, Jonathan N. & Edelman, David B. & Thomas, Lyn C., 2007. "Recent developments in consumer credit risk assessment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 183(3), pages 1447-1465, December.
    13. Dorfleitner, G. & Just-Marx, S. & Priberny, C., 2017. "What drives the repayment of agricultural micro loans? Evidence from Nicaragua," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 89-100.
    14. Adrien Ehrhardt & Christophe Biernacki & Vincent Vandewalle & Philippe Heinrich & S'ebastien Beben, 2019. "R\'eint\'egration des refus\'es en Credit Scoring," Papers 1903.10855, arXiv.org.
    15. Andreeva, Galina & Calabrese, Raffaella & Osmetti, Silvia Angela, 2016. "A comparative analysis of the UK and Italian small businesses using Generalised Extreme Value models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(2), pages 506-516.
    16. J Banasik & J Crook, 2005. "Credit scoring, augmentation and lean models," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(9), pages 1072-1081, September.
    17. Gero Szepannek, 2022. "An Overview on the Landscape of R Packages for Open Source Scorecard Modelling," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-33, March.
    18. Gorodnichenko, Yuriy & Sabirianova Peter, Klara, 2007. "Public sector pay and corruption: Measuring bribery from micro data," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(5-6), pages 963-991, June.
    19. Burt S. Barnow & Jeffrey Smith, 2015. "Employment and Training Programs," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States, Volume 2, pages 127-234, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Myck, Michal & Nici?ska, Anna & Morawski, Leszek, 2009. "Count Your Hours: Returns to Education in Poland," IZA Discussion Papers 4332, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2209.07574. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.