Systematic review of bankruptcy prediction models: Towards a framework for tool selection

•No single tool satisfies all criteria required in bankruptcy prediction.•A framework for tool selection based on priority criteria is proposed.•Support vector machine performs well on small sample sizes in bankruptcy prediction. The bankruptcy prediction research domain continues to evolve with man...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Expert systems with applications 2018-03, Vol.94, p.164-184
Hauptverfasser: Alaka, Hafiz A., Oyedele, Lukumon O., Owolabi, Hakeem A., Kumar, Vikas, Ajayi, Saheed O., Akinade, Olugbenga O., Bilal, Muhammad
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 184
container_issue
container_start_page 164
container_title Expert systems with applications
container_volume 94
creator Alaka, Hafiz A.
Oyedele, Lukumon O.
Owolabi, Hakeem A.
Kumar, Vikas
Ajayi, Saheed O.
Akinade, Olugbenga O.
Bilal, Muhammad
description •No single tool satisfies all criteria required in bankruptcy prediction.•A framework for tool selection based on priority criteria is proposed.•Support vector machine performs well on small sample sizes in bankruptcy prediction. The bankruptcy prediction research domain continues to evolve with many new different predictive models developed using various tools. Yet many of the tools are used with the wrong data conditions or for the wrong situation. Using the Web of Science, Business Source Complete and Engineering Village databases, a systematic review of 49 journal articles published between 2010 and 2015 was carried out. This review shows how eight popular and promising tools perform based on 13 key criteria within the bankruptcy prediction models research area. These tools include two statistical tools: multiple discriminant analysis and Logistic regression; and six artificial intelligence tools: artificial neural network, support vector machines, rough sets, case based reasoning, decision tree and genetic algorithm. The 13 criteria identified include accuracy, result transparency, fully deterministic output, data size capability, data dispersion, variable selection method required, variable types applicable, and more. Overall, it was found that no single tool is predominantly better than other tools in relation to the 13 identified criteria. A tabular and a diagrammatic framework are provided as guidelines for the selection of tools that best fit different situations. It is concluded that an overall better performance model can only be found by informed integration of tools to form a hybrid model. This paper contributes towards a thorough understanding of the features of the tools used to develop bankruptcy prediction models and their related shortcomings.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.eswa.2017.10.040
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1990826599</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0957417417307224</els_id><sourcerecordid>1990826599</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-c20d5222a640a0cae6b01e56482c2f8964548ad43fc87b7ad67a1dec47e5e6b83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhoMouK7-AU8Bz61JmiateJHFL1jw4HrwFLLJFNptm5p0LfvvTV3PngZenneGeRC6piSlhIrbJoUw6ZQRKmOQEk5O0IIWMkuELLNTtCBlLhNOJT9HFyE0JIKEyAX6fD-EETo91gZ7-K5hwq7CW93v_H4YzQEPHmxtxtr1uHMW2nCHN27S3gasceV1B5PzO1w5j0fnWhyghV_8Ep1Vug1w9TeX6OPpcbN6SdZvz6-rh3ViOCNjYhixOWNMC040MRrEllDIBS-YYVVRCp7zQlueVaaQW6mtkJpaMFxCHtkiW6Kb497Bu689hFE1bu_7eFLRsiQFE3lZRoodKeNdCB4qNfi60_6gKFGzQtWoWaGaFc5ZVBhL98dSfHt241UwNfQmGvHxSWVd_V_9B8Hce28</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1990826599</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Systematic review of bankruptcy prediction models: Towards a framework for tool selection</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Alaka, Hafiz A. ; Oyedele, Lukumon O. ; Owolabi, Hakeem A. ; Kumar, Vikas ; Ajayi, Saheed O. ; Akinade, Olugbenga O. ; Bilal, Muhammad</creator><creatorcontrib>Alaka, Hafiz A. ; Oyedele, Lukumon O. ; Owolabi, Hakeem A. ; Kumar, Vikas ; Ajayi, Saheed O. ; Akinade, Olugbenga O. ; Bilal, Muhammad</creatorcontrib><description>•No single tool satisfies all criteria required in bankruptcy prediction.•A framework for tool selection based on priority criteria is proposed.•Support vector machine performs well on small sample sizes in bankruptcy prediction. The bankruptcy prediction research domain continues to evolve with many new different predictive models developed using various tools. Yet many of the tools are used with the wrong data conditions or for the wrong situation. Using the Web of Science, Business Source Complete and Engineering Village databases, a systematic review of 49 journal articles published between 2010 and 2015 was carried out. This review shows how eight popular and promising tools perform based on 13 key criteria within the bankruptcy prediction models research area. These tools include two statistical tools: multiple discriminant analysis and Logistic regression; and six artificial intelligence tools: artificial neural network, support vector machines, rough sets, case based reasoning, decision tree and genetic algorithm. The 13 criteria identified include accuracy, result transparency, fully deterministic output, data size capability, data dispersion, variable selection method required, variable types applicable, and more. Overall, it was found that no single tool is predominantly better than other tools in relation to the 13 identified criteria. A tabular and a diagrammatic framework are provided as guidelines for the selection of tools that best fit different situations. It is concluded that an overall better performance model can only be found by informed integration of tools to form a hybrid model. This paper contributes towards a thorough understanding of the features of the tools used to develop bankruptcy prediction models and their related shortcomings.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0957-4174</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-6793</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2017.10.040</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Artificial intelligence ; Artificial intelligence tools ; Artificial neural networks ; Bankruptcy ; Bankruptcy prediction tools ; Criteria ; Discriminant analysis ; Error types ; Financial ratios ; Genetic algorithms ; Mathematical models ; Prediction models ; Predictions ; Regression analysis ; Statistical analysis ; Statistical tools ; Studies ; Support vector machines ; Systematic review ; Tool selection framework</subject><ispartof>Expert systems with applications, 2018-03, Vol.94, p.164-184</ispartof><rights>2017 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier BV Mar 15, 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-c20d5222a640a0cae6b01e56482c2f8964548ad43fc87b7ad67a1dec47e5e6b83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-c20d5222a640a0cae6b01e56482c2f8964548ad43fc87b7ad67a1dec47e5e6b83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957417417307224$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Alaka, Hafiz A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oyedele, Lukumon O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Owolabi, Hakeem A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kumar, Vikas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ajayi, Saheed O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akinade, Olugbenga O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bilal, Muhammad</creatorcontrib><title>Systematic review of bankruptcy prediction models: Towards a framework for tool selection</title><title>Expert systems with applications</title><description>•No single tool satisfies all criteria required in bankruptcy prediction.•A framework for tool selection based on priority criteria is proposed.•Support vector machine performs well on small sample sizes in bankruptcy prediction. The bankruptcy prediction research domain continues to evolve with many new different predictive models developed using various tools. Yet many of the tools are used with the wrong data conditions or for the wrong situation. Using the Web of Science, Business Source Complete and Engineering Village databases, a systematic review of 49 journal articles published between 2010 and 2015 was carried out. This review shows how eight popular and promising tools perform based on 13 key criteria within the bankruptcy prediction models research area. These tools include two statistical tools: multiple discriminant analysis and Logistic regression; and six artificial intelligence tools: artificial neural network, support vector machines, rough sets, case based reasoning, decision tree and genetic algorithm. The 13 criteria identified include accuracy, result transparency, fully deterministic output, data size capability, data dispersion, variable selection method required, variable types applicable, and more. Overall, it was found that no single tool is predominantly better than other tools in relation to the 13 identified criteria. A tabular and a diagrammatic framework are provided as guidelines for the selection of tools that best fit different situations. It is concluded that an overall better performance model can only be found by informed integration of tools to form a hybrid model. This paper contributes towards a thorough understanding of the features of the tools used to develop bankruptcy prediction models and their related shortcomings.</description><subject>Artificial intelligence</subject><subject>Artificial intelligence tools</subject><subject>Artificial neural networks</subject><subject>Bankruptcy</subject><subject>Bankruptcy prediction tools</subject><subject>Criteria</subject><subject>Discriminant analysis</subject><subject>Error types</subject><subject>Financial ratios</subject><subject>Genetic algorithms</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Prediction models</subject><subject>Predictions</subject><subject>Regression analysis</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Statistical tools</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Support vector machines</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Tool selection framework</subject><issn>0957-4174</issn><issn>1873-6793</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhoMouK7-AU8Bz61JmiateJHFL1jw4HrwFLLJFNptm5p0LfvvTV3PngZenneGeRC6piSlhIrbJoUw6ZQRKmOQEk5O0IIWMkuELLNTtCBlLhNOJT9HFyE0JIKEyAX6fD-EETo91gZ7-K5hwq7CW93v_H4YzQEPHmxtxtr1uHMW2nCHN27S3gasceV1B5PzO1w5j0fnWhyghV_8Ep1Vug1w9TeX6OPpcbN6SdZvz6-rh3ViOCNjYhixOWNMC040MRrEllDIBS-YYVVRCp7zQlueVaaQW6mtkJpaMFxCHtkiW6Kb497Bu689hFE1bu_7eFLRsiQFE3lZRoodKeNdCB4qNfi60_6gKFGzQtWoWaGaFc5ZVBhL98dSfHt241UwNfQmGvHxSWVd_V_9B8Hce28</recordid><startdate>20180315</startdate><enddate>20180315</enddate><creator>Alaka, Hafiz A.</creator><creator>Oyedele, Lukumon O.</creator><creator>Owolabi, Hakeem A.</creator><creator>Kumar, Vikas</creator><creator>Ajayi, Saheed O.</creator><creator>Akinade, Olugbenga O.</creator><creator>Bilal, Muhammad</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier BV</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20180315</creationdate><title>Systematic review of bankruptcy prediction models: Towards a framework for tool selection</title><author>Alaka, Hafiz A. ; Oyedele, Lukumon O. ; Owolabi, Hakeem A. ; Kumar, Vikas ; Ajayi, Saheed O. ; Akinade, Olugbenga O. ; Bilal, Muhammad</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-c20d5222a640a0cae6b01e56482c2f8964548ad43fc87b7ad67a1dec47e5e6b83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Artificial intelligence</topic><topic>Artificial intelligence tools</topic><topic>Artificial neural networks</topic><topic>Bankruptcy</topic><topic>Bankruptcy prediction tools</topic><topic>Criteria</topic><topic>Discriminant analysis</topic><topic>Error types</topic><topic>Financial ratios</topic><topic>Genetic algorithms</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Prediction models</topic><topic>Predictions</topic><topic>Regression analysis</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Statistical tools</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Support vector machines</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Tool selection framework</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Alaka, Hafiz A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oyedele, Lukumon O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Owolabi, Hakeem A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kumar, Vikas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ajayi, Saheed O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akinade, Olugbenga O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bilal, Muhammad</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><jtitle>Expert systems with applications</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Alaka, Hafiz A.</au><au>Oyedele, Lukumon O.</au><au>Owolabi, Hakeem A.</au><au>Kumar, Vikas</au><au>Ajayi, Saheed O.</au><au>Akinade, Olugbenga O.</au><au>Bilal, Muhammad</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Systematic review of bankruptcy prediction models: Towards a framework for tool selection</atitle><jtitle>Expert systems with applications</jtitle><date>2018-03-15</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>94</volume><spage>164</spage><epage>184</epage><pages>164-184</pages><issn>0957-4174</issn><eissn>1873-6793</eissn><abstract>•No single tool satisfies all criteria required in bankruptcy prediction.•A framework for tool selection based on priority criteria is proposed.•Support vector machine performs well on small sample sizes in bankruptcy prediction. The bankruptcy prediction research domain continues to evolve with many new different predictive models developed using various tools. Yet many of the tools are used with the wrong data conditions or for the wrong situation. Using the Web of Science, Business Source Complete and Engineering Village databases, a systematic review of 49 journal articles published between 2010 and 2015 was carried out. This review shows how eight popular and promising tools perform based on 13 key criteria within the bankruptcy prediction models research area. These tools include two statistical tools: multiple discriminant analysis and Logistic regression; and six artificial intelligence tools: artificial neural network, support vector machines, rough sets, case based reasoning, decision tree and genetic algorithm. The 13 criteria identified include accuracy, result transparency, fully deterministic output, data size capability, data dispersion, variable selection method required, variable types applicable, and more. Overall, it was found that no single tool is predominantly better than other tools in relation to the 13 identified criteria. A tabular and a diagrammatic framework are provided as guidelines for the selection of tools that best fit different situations. It is concluded that an overall better performance model can only be found by informed integration of tools to form a hybrid model. This paper contributes towards a thorough understanding of the features of the tools used to develop bankruptcy prediction models and their related shortcomings.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.eswa.2017.10.040</doi><tpages>21</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0957-4174
ispartof Expert systems with applications, 2018-03, Vol.94, p.164-184
issn 0957-4174
1873-6793
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1990826599
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Artificial intelligence
Artificial intelligence tools
Artificial neural networks
Bankruptcy
Bankruptcy prediction tools
Criteria
Discriminant analysis
Error types
Financial ratios
Genetic algorithms
Mathematical models
Prediction models
Predictions
Regression analysis
Statistical analysis
Statistical tools
Studies
Support vector machines
Systematic review
Tool selection framework
title Systematic review of bankruptcy prediction models: Towards a framework for tool selection
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T18%3A05%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Systematic%20review%20of%20bankruptcy%20prediction%20models:%20Towards%20a%20framework%20for%20tool%20selection&rft.jtitle=Expert%20systems%20with%20applications&rft.au=Alaka,%20Hafiz%20A.&rft.date=2018-03-15&rft.volume=94&rft.spage=164&rft.epage=184&rft.pages=164-184&rft.issn=0957-4174&rft.eissn=1873-6793&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.eswa.2017.10.040&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1990826599%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1990826599&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0957417417307224&rfr_iscdi=true