A Cooperative Classification System for Credit Scoring

  • Dalila BoughaciEmail author
  • Abdullah A. K. Alkhawaldeh
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Science, Technology & Innovation book series (ASTI)


Credit scoring (CS) is an important process in both banking and finance. CS is a score measure that helps lenders and creditors to see how good the borrower is. It indicates how likely the borrower is to pay back the owed debt, based on its past borrowing behavior. For instance, this score can be used to avoid risk and provide an objective analysis of the applicant’s creditworthiness which reduces credit risk. Also CS allows the automation of the lending process which leads to increase the speed and consistency of the borrower’s application. In this paper, we propose to use agents’ technology to develop a cooperative classification system for credit scoring. Empirical studies are conducted on five well-known financial datasets. We distribute the complex classification problem on a set of intelligent and cooperative agents where each agent evaluates a given machine learning algorithm on the considered dataset. The use of agents in the classification process provides a high degree of flexibility and allows for a faster time scale of data analysis.


Credit scoring Credit risk Machine learning Cooperative agents Intelligent agents Financial datasets 


  1. 1.
    Miller, M.: Research confirms value of credit scoring. Nat. Underwriter 107(42), 30 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mester. L.J.: What’s the point of credit scoring? Business Review (September), pp. 3–16 (1977)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sousaa, M.R., Gamaa, J., Brand˜ao, E.: A new dynamic modeling framework for credit risk assessment. Expert Syst. Appl. 16, 2015 (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hand, D.J., Henley, W.E.: Statistical classification methods in consumer credit scoring. J. Roy. Stat. Soc. Ser. A (Stat. Soc.) 160, 523–541 (1997)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wiginton. J.C.: A note on the comparison of logit and discriminant models of consumer credit behavior. J. Financ. Quantit. Anal. 15, 757–770 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Quinlan. J.R.: Simplifying decision trees. Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud. 27, 221–234 (Dec 1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Breiman, L., Friedman, J., Olshen, R., Stone, C.: Classification and Regression Trees. Wadsworth, Belmont, CA (1984)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Desay, V., Crook, J.N., Overstreet, G.A.: A comparison of neural networks and linear scoring models in the credit union environment. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 95, 24–37 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bellotti, T., Crook, J.: Support vector machines for credit scoring and discovery of significant features. Expert Syst. Appl. 36, 3302–3308 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Huerta, E.B., Duval, B., Hao, J.K.: A hybrid GA/SVM approach for gene selection and classification of microarray data. In: Rothlanf et al. (eds.) EvoWorkshops 2006, LNCS 3907, pp. 34–44 (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Friedman, N., Geiger, D., Goldszmidt, M.: Bayesian network classifiers. Mach. Learn. 29, 131–163 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Abdou, H.A.: Genetic programming for credit scoring: the case of Egyptian public sector banks. Expert Syst. Appl. 36, 11402–11417 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Henley, W.E., Hand, D.J.: A k-nearest neighbour classifier for assessing consumer credit risk. Statistician 45, 77–95 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li, J., Wei, L., Li, G., Xu, W.: An evolution strategy-based multiple kernels multi-criteria programming approach: the case of credit decision making. Decis. Support Syst. 51, 292–298 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abelln, J., Mantas, C.J.: Improving experimental studies about ensembles of classifiers for bankruptcy prediction and credit scoring. Expert Syst. Appl. 41, 3825–3830 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Boughaci, D., Ider, K., Yahiaou, S.: Design and implementation of a misused intrusion detection system using autonomous and mobile agents. EATIS 12 (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Boughaci, D., Drias, H., Bendib, A., Bouznit, Y., Benhamou, B.: Distributed intrusion detection framework based on autonomous and mobile agents. In: 2006 International Conference on Dependability of Computer Systems DepCoSRELCOMEX 2006, 24–28 May 2006, Szklarska Poreba, Poland, pp: 248–255 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ho, T.K.: Random decision forests. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition, Montreal, QC, 14–16 Aug 1995, pp. 278–282 (1995)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cox, D.R.: The regression analysis of binary sequences (with discussion). J. Roy. Stat. Soc. B. 20, 215–242 (1958). (JSTOR)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Holte, R.C.: Very simple classification rules perform well on most commonly used datasets. Mach. Learn. 11, 63–91 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Friedman, J., Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R.: Additive logistic regression: a statistical view of boosting. Ann. Stat. 28(2), 337–407 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Freund, Y., Schapire, R.E.: A decision-theoretic generalization of on-line learning and an application to boosting. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 55, 1–19 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    UCI (University of California at Irvine):, Accessed Nov 2017
  24. 24.
    Kaggle website:, Accessed Nov 2017
  25. 25.
    Kohavi, R., John, G.: Wrappers for feature subset selection. Artif. Intell. Special issue on relevance, 273–324 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Caruana, R., Freitag, D.: Greedy attribute selection. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Machine Learning, (ICML 1994, New Brunswick, New Jersey), Morgan Kauffmann, pp. 28–36 (1994)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jolliffe, I.T.: Principal component analysis. Series: Springer Series in Statistics, 2nd edn., Springer, NY, XXIX, 487, p. 28 illus. ISBN: 978-0-387-95442-4 (2002)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jade (Java Agent DEvelopment Framework): Jade Site:, Accessed Nov 2017
  29. 29.
    Waikato Environment for Knowledge Analysis (WEKA), Version 3.9. The University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand, Software available at∼ml/weka/, Accessed Nov 2017
  30. 30.
    Powers, D.M.W.: Evaluation: from precision, recall and f-measure to ROC, informedness, markedness & correlation. J. Mach. Learn. Technol. 2(1), 37–63 (2011)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentLRIA-FEI- USTHBAlgiersAlgeria
  2. 2.Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Administrative SciencesThe Hashemite UniversityZarqaJordan

Personalised recommendations