Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Explainable AI for Interpretable Credit Scoring

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2012.03749 v1 pith:3J3IN3OE submitted 2020-12-03 q-fin.RM cs.AIcs.LG

classification q-fin.RMcs.AIcs.LG
keywords creditscoringmodeldifferentinterpretabledatadecisionsexplainable
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

With the ever-growing achievements in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the recent boosted enthusiasm in Financial Technology (FinTech), applications such as credit scoring have gained substantial academic interest. Credit scoring helps financial experts make better decisions regarding whether or not to accept a loan application, such that loans with a high probability of default are not accepted. Apart from the noisy and highly imbalanced data challenges faced by such credit scoring models, recent regulations such as the `right to explanation' introduced by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) have added the need for model interpretability to ensure that algorithmic decisions are understandable and coherent. An interesting concept that has been recently introduced is eXplainable AI (XAI), which focuses on making black-box models more interpretable. In this work, we present a credit scoring model that is both accurate and interpretable. For classification, state-of-the-art performance on the Home Equity Line of Credit (HELOC) and Lending Club (LC) Datasets is achieved using the Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) model. The model is then further enhanced with a 360-degree explanation framework, which provides different explanations (i.e. global, local feature-based and local instance-based) that are required by different people in different situations. Evaluation through the use of functionallygrounded, application-grounded and human-grounded analysis show that the explanations provided are simple, consistent as well as satisfy the six predetermined hypotheses testing for correctness, effectiveness, easy understanding, detail sufficiency and trustworthiness.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. NOMADD: Numerical Optimization of Models Adapting to Data Drift

    cs.LG 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    NOMADD fits a model on each past time period, compresses parameter changes with low-rank SVD, and extrapolates a damped linear trend to predict the model's future boundary, improving drift robustness across models fro...

  2. Explainability in Practice: A Survey of Explainable NLP Across Various Domains

    cs.CL 2025-02 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    A survey of explainable NLP across application domains, with evaluation metrics, but with several inaccurate paper-to-application mappings.

Pith tools