Cited by 179Financial Distress and Bankruptcy PredictionImbalanced Data Classification TechniquesCustomer churn and segmentation

Development and application of consumer credit scoring models using profit-based classification measures

Open access
Verbraken, Thomas, Bravo, Cristián, Weber, Richard, Baesens, Bart·2014·European Journal of Operational Research

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejor.2014.04.001

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The MP measure allows selecting the optimal model and proportion of customers to be included in the campaign, potentially yielding a significant increase in profitability relative to the profit earned if statistical measures are used.

    “This measure allows selecting the optimal model and proportion of customers to be included in the campaign, potentially yielding a significant increase in profitability relative to the profit earned if statistical measures are used [19].”

    From Why you should stop predicting customer churn and start using uplift models (2021) · cites this paper as [19]

    Section 3.1 says MP can select the model with the highest incremental profit and defines the optimal fraction of customers toward whom an action should be taken. But the paper applies these measures to consumer credit decisions, not campaign inclusion. Its profitability comparison with statistical measures in Section 4.4 concerns EMP rather than MP, so the claim conflates the measures and settings. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Verbraken, T., Bravo, C., Weber, R., & Baesens, B.
Affiliations
  • KU Leuven (BE)
  • Universidad de Talca (CL)
  • University of Chile (CL)
  • University of Southampton (GB)
Corresponding author
Bravo, Cristián
Venue
European Journal of Operational Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-10
Volume
238
Issue
2
Pages
505-513
ISSN
0377-2217 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1973982793
Cited by
179
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
26.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Journal of Operational Research (publishedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
  • Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Universidad de Chile (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
  • Comisión Nacional de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica (FBO16, P-05-004-F)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Financial Distress and Bankruptcy Prediction
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Imbalanced Data Classification Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Customer churn and segmentation
Keywords
consumer credit scoring, credit risk modeling, loss given default, operational income, model deployment, government loans

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review