Cited by 23Financial Distress and Bankruptcy PredictionArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareStock Market Forecasting Methods

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An Explainable Hybrid Model for Bankruptcy Prediction Based on the Decision Tree and Deep Neural Network

Chou, Tsung-Nan·2019·2019 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Knowledge Innovation and Invention (ICKII)

Abstract

For investors seeking solutions to optimize their portfolio of assets to generate profits and minimize losses, choosing a sophisticated model to evaluate the risk of corporate financial distress will be crucial to support their asset management and investment decisions. Both the machine learning and the newly developed deep learning techniques have been employed to construct bankruptcy prediction models for decades. However, applying the deep learning models might increase the predictive accuracy in exchange for losing model interpretability, because the structure and parameters of the model are not easy to provide accountability for investors. In this study, a hybrid approach integrating the decision tree with the deep neural network was proposed to provide a compromise solution for investors. The decision tree was adopted as the primary model to provide explainable ability, while the deep neural network was chosen to improve predictive accuracy. The decision fusion of two models was designed with the compensatory and non-compensatory approaches. The hybrid model was implemented by concatenating the deep neural network to the selected branches of decision tree that perform poor predictive accuracy during model training. The empirical results showed that the predictive accuracy of the deep neural network and the decision tree were 80% and 87% respectively, and the overall accuracy was improved to 91% by the hybrid model.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/ickii46306.2019.9042639

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2870052 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1109/TNNLS.2018.2869694 · DOI
  3. 10.1109/PAC.2018.00013 · DOI
  4. 10.18653/v1/N16-3020 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1109/ICTEmSys.2017.7958771 · DOI
  6. 10.1109/ICISC.2018.8399072 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 23

Metadata

Authors
Chou, T.-N.
Affiliations
Chaoyang University of Technology (TW)
Corresponding author
Chou, Tsung-Nan
Venue
2019 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Knowledge Innovation and Invention (ICKII)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2019-07
Pages
122-125
OpenAlex
W3013359911
Cited by
23
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1
FWCI
5.71
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE International Conference on Knowledge Innovation and Invention (ICKII) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Financial Distress and Bankruptcy Prediction
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Stock Market Forecasting Methods
Keywords
bankruptcy prediction, corporate financial distress, explainable machine learning, model interpretability, decision fusion, investment risk assessment

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