Cost of Explainability in AI: An Example with Credit Scoring Models

被引:1
|
作者
Dessain, Jean [1 ,2 ]
Bentaleb, Nora [2 ]
Vinas, Fabien [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Lille, IESEG Sch Management, F-59000 Lille, France
[2] Reacfin, Pl Univ 25, B-1348 Louvain La Neuve, Belgium
[3] Allianz Trade, Tour First,1 Pl Saisons, F-92400 Courbevoie, France
关键词
Explainable AI; Credit Risk; Credit Scoring; Interpretability; Economic Performance; CLASSIFICATION;
D O I
10.1007/978-3-031-44064-9_26
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
This paper examines the cost of explainability in machine learning models for credit scoring. The analysis is conducted under the constraint of meeting the regulatory requirements of the European Central Bank (ECB), using a real-life dataset of over 50,000 credit exposures. We compare the statistical and financial performances of black-box models, such as XGBoost and neural networks, with inherently explainable models like logistic regression and GAMs. Notably, statistical performance does not necessarily correlate with financial performance. Our results reveal a difference of 15 to 20 basis points in annual return on investment between the best performing black-box model and the best performing inherently explainable model, as cost of explainability. We also find that the cost of explainability increases together with the risk appetite. To enhance the interpretability of explainable models, we apply isotonic smoothing of features' shape functions based on expert judgment. Our findings suggest that incorporating expert judgment in the form of isotonic smoothing improves the explainability without compromising the performance. These results have significant implications for the use of explainable models in credit risk assessment and for regulatory compliance.
引用
收藏
页码:498 / 516
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Transparency, auditability, and explainability of machine learning models in credit scoring
    Buecker, Michael
    Szepannek, Gero
    Gosiewska, Alicja
    Biecek, Przemyslaw
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOCIETY, 2022, 73 (01) : 70 - 90
  • [2] Assuring explainability on demand response targeting via credit scoring
    Lee, Kyungeun
    Lee, Hyesu
    Lee, Hyoseop
    Yoon, Yoonjin
    Lee, Eunjung
    Rhee, Wonjong
    [J]. ENERGY, 2018, 161 : 670 - 679
  • [3] Example-Dependent Cost-Sensitive Logistic Regression for Credit Scoring
    Bahnsen, Alejandro Correa
    Aouada, Djamila
    Ottersten, Bjorn
    [J]. 2014 13TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MACHINE LEARNING AND APPLICATIONS (ICMLA), 2014, : 263 - 269
  • [4] Responsible AI in automated credit scoring systems
    Krishna Ravali Jammalamadaka
    Srikanth Itapu
    [J]. AI and Ethics, 2023, 3 (2): : 485 - 495
  • [5] Subagging for credit scoring models
    Paleologo, Giuseppe
    Elisseeff, Andre
    Antonini, Gianluca
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2010, 201 (02) : 490 - 499
  • [6] The total cost of misclassification in credit scoring: A comparison of generalized linear models and generalized additive models
    Lohmann, Christian
    Ohliger, Thorsten
    [J]. JOURNAL OF FORECASTING, 2019, 38 (05) : 375 - 389
  • [7] FROM CREDIT SCORING TO REGULATORY SCORING: COMPARING CREDIT SCORING MODELS FROM A REGULATORY PERSPECTIVE
    Xia, Yufei
    Liao, Zijun
    Xu, Jun
    LI, Yinguo
    [J]. TECHNOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF ECONOMY, 2022, 28 (06) : 1954 - 1990
  • [8] A Theoretical Framework for AI Models Explainability with Application in Biomedicine
    Rizzo, Matteo
    Veneri, Alberto
    Albarelli, Andrea
    Lucchese, Claudio
    Nobile, Marco
    Conati, Cristina
    [J]. 2023 IEEE CONFERENCE ON COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE IN BIOINFORMATICS AND COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY, CIBCB, 2023, : 199 - 207
  • [9] A comparison study of credit scoring models
    Zhang, Defu
    Huang, Hongyi
    Chen, Qingshan
    Jiang, Yi
    [J]. ICNC 2007: THIRD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON NATURAL COMPUTATION, VOL 1, PROCEEDINGS, 2007, : 15 - +
  • [10] Credit scoring, augmentation and lean models
    Banasik, J
    Crook, J
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOCIETY, 2005, 56 (09) : 1072 - 1081