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
  • [41] Credit scoring using global and local statistical models
    Schwarz, A
    Arminger, G
    [J]. Classification - the Ubiquitous Challenge, 2005, : 442 - 449
  • [42] Decision Trees as Interpretable Bank Credit Scoring Models
    Szwabe, Andrzej
    Misiorek, Pawel
    [J]. BEYOND DATABASES, ARCHITECTURES AND STRUCTURES: FACING THE CHALLENGES OF DATA PROLIFERATION AND GROWING VARIETY, 2018, 928 : 207 - 219
  • [43] A review of fuzzy logic applied to credit scoring models
    Gomez Jaramillo, Sebastian
    [J]. CUADERNO ACTIVA, 2012, (03): : 37 - 44
  • [44] Review of Machine Learning models for Credit Scoring Analysis
    Kumar, Madapuri Rudra
    Gunjan, Vinit Kumar
    [J]. INGENIERIA SOLIDARIA, 2020, 16 (01):
  • [45] Generalized Partially Linear Additive Models for Credit Scoring
    Shim, Ju-Hyun
    Lee, Young K.
    [J]. KOREAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED STATISTICS, 2011, 24 (04) : 587 - 595
  • [46] Building credit scoring models using genetic programming
    Ong, CS
    Huang, JJ
    Tzeng, GH
    [J]. EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, 2005, 29 (01) : 41 - 47
  • [47] Deep generative models for reject inference in credit scoring
    Mancisidor, Rogelio A.
    Kampffmeyer, Michael
    Aas, Kjersti
    Jenssen, Robert
    [J]. KNOWLEDGE-BASED SYSTEMS, 2020, 196
  • [48] AI Explainability 360 Toolkit
    Arya, Vijay
    Bellamy, Rachel K. E.
    Chen, Pin-Yu
    Dhurandhar, Amit
    Hind, Michael
    Hoffman, Samuel C.
    Houde, Stephanie
    Liao, Q. Vera
    Luss, Ronny
    Mojsilovic, Aleksandra
    Mourad, Sami
    Pedemonte, Pablo
    Raghavendra, Ramya
    Richards, John
    Sattigeri, Prasanna
    Shanmugam, Karthikeyan
    Singh, Moninder
    Varshney, Kush R.
    Wei, Dennis
    Zhang, Yunfeng
    [J]. CODS-COMAD 2021: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 3RD ACM INDIA JOINT INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON DATA SCIENCE & MANAGEMENT OF DATA (8TH ACM IKDD CODS & 26TH COMAD), 2021, : 376 - 379
  • [49] Multidimensional Rasch models for partial-credit scoring
    Kelderman, H
    [J]. APPLIED PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1996, 20 (02) : 155 - 168
  • [50] Application of selected scoring models on corporate credit rating
    Novotna, Martina
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE 29TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MATHEMATICAL METHODS IN ECONOMICS 2011, PTS I AND II, 2011, : 511 - 516