Is Artificial Intelligence Really More Accurate in Predicting Bankruptcy?

IF 2.1 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE International Journal of Financial Studies Pub Date : 2024-01-18 DOI:10.3390/ijfs12010008
Stanislav Letkovský, Sylvia Jenčová, Petra Vašaničová
{"title":"Is Artificial Intelligence Really More Accurate in Predicting Bankruptcy?","authors":"Stanislav Letkovský, Sylvia Jenčová, Petra Vašaničová","doi":"10.3390/ijfs12010008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Predicting bankruptcy within selected industries is crucial because of the potential ripple effects and unique characteristics of those industries. It serves as a risk management tool, guiding various stakeholders in making decisions. While artificial intelligence (AI) has shown high success rates in classification tasks, it remains uncertain whether its use significantly enhances the potential for early warning of impending problems. The following question arises: will classical methods eventually replace the effectiveness of these advanced techniques? This paper sheds light on the fact that even classical methods continue to achieve results that are not far behind, highlighting their enduring importance in financial analysis. This paper aims to develop bankruptcy prediction models for the chemical industry in Slovakia and to compare their effectiveness. Predictions are generated using the classical logistic regression (LR) method as well as AI techniques, artificial neural networks (ANNs), support vector machines (SVMs), and decision trees (DTs). The analysis aims to determine which of the employed methods is the most efficient. The research sample consists of circa 600 enterprises operating in the Slovak chemical industry. The selection of eleven financial indicators used for bankruptcy prediction was grounded in prior research and existing literature. The results show that all of the explored methods yielded highly similar outcomes. Therefore, determining the clear superiority of any single method is a difficult task. This might be partially due to the potentially reduced quality of the input data. In addition to classical statistical methods employed in econometrics, there is an ongoing development of AI-based models and their hybrid forms. The following question arises: to what extent can these newer approaches enhance accuracy and effectiveness?","PeriodicalId":45794,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Financial Studies","volume":"389 1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Financial Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs12010008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Predicting bankruptcy within selected industries is crucial because of the potential ripple effects and unique characteristics of those industries. It serves as a risk management tool, guiding various stakeholders in making decisions. While artificial intelligence (AI) has shown high success rates in classification tasks, it remains uncertain whether its use significantly enhances the potential for early warning of impending problems. The following question arises: will classical methods eventually replace the effectiveness of these advanced techniques? This paper sheds light on the fact that even classical methods continue to achieve results that are not far behind, highlighting their enduring importance in financial analysis. This paper aims to develop bankruptcy prediction models for the chemical industry in Slovakia and to compare their effectiveness. Predictions are generated using the classical logistic regression (LR) method as well as AI techniques, artificial neural networks (ANNs), support vector machines (SVMs), and decision trees (DTs). The analysis aims to determine which of the employed methods is the most efficient. The research sample consists of circa 600 enterprises operating in the Slovak chemical industry. The selection of eleven financial indicators used for bankruptcy prediction was grounded in prior research and existing literature. The results show that all of the explored methods yielded highly similar outcomes. Therefore, determining the clear superiority of any single method is a difficult task. This might be partially due to the potentially reduced quality of the input data. In addition to classical statistical methods employed in econometrics, there is an ongoing development of AI-based models and their hybrid forms. The following question arises: to what extent can these newer approaches enhance accuracy and effectiveness?
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人工智能真的能更准确地预测破产吗?
由于选定行业的潜在连锁反应和独特性,预测这些行业的破产至关重要。它可作为风险管理工具,指导各利益相关方做出决策。虽然人工智能(AI)在分类任务中显示出很高的成功率,但其使用是否能显著提高对即将发生的问题进行预警的潜力,目前仍不确定。由此产生的问题是:传统方法是否会最终取代这些先进技术的有效性?本文揭示了这样一个事实,即即使是经典方法也能继续取得不落人后的结果,这凸显了它们在金融分析中的持久重要性。本文旨在开发斯洛伐克化工行业的破产预测模型,并比较其有效性。预测使用经典的逻辑回归 (LR) 方法以及人工智能技术、人工神经网络 (ANN)、支持向量机 (SVM) 和决策树 (DT) 生成。分析的目的是确定所采用的方法中哪种最有效。研究样本由斯洛伐克化工行业的约 600 家企业组成。用于破产预测的 11 个财务指标的选择是以先前的研究和现有文献为基础的。结果表明,所有探讨的方法都产生了高度相似的结果。因此,确定任何一种方法的明显优越性都是一项艰巨的任务。部分原因可能是输入数据的质量可能较低。除了计量经济学中使用的经典统计方法外,基于人工智能的模型及其混合形式也在不断发展。下面的问题是:这些新方法能在多大程度上提高准确性和有效性?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
8.70%
发文量
100
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Financial Interdependencies: Analyzing the Volatility Linkages between Real Estate Investment Trusts, Sukuk, and Oil in GCC Countries Impacts of Digital Transformation and Basel III Implementation on the Credit Risk Level of Vietnamese Commercial Banks Deregulating the Volume Limit on Share Repurchases Microcredit Pricing Model for Microfinance Institutions under Basel III Banking Regulations Efficiency of Healthcare Financing: Case of European Countries
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1