Machine learning (ML), the newest buzzword, has swept into the lexicon and captured the interest of us all. Its recent, widespread popularity has stemmed mainly from the consumer perspective. Whether it’s virtual assistants, self-driving cars or romantic matchmaking, ML has rapidly positioned itself into the mainstream.
Though ML may appear to be a new technology, its use in commercial applications has been around for some time. In fact, many of the data scientists and statisticians at Experian are considered pioneers in the field of ML, going back decades. Our team has developed numerous products and processes leveraging ML, from our world-class consumer fraud and ID protection to producing credit data products like our Trended 3DTM attributes. In fact, we were just highlighted in the Wall Street Journal for how we’re using machine learning to improve our internal IT performance.
ML’s ability to consume vast amounts of data to uncover patterns and deliver results that are not humanly possible otherwise is what makes it unique and applicable to so many fields. This predictive power has now sparked interest in the credit risk industry. Unlike fraud detection, where ML is well-established and used extensively, credit risk modeling has until recently taken a cautionary approach to adopting newer ML algorithms. Because of regulatory scrutiny and perceived lack of transparency, ML hasn’t experienced the broad acceptance as some of credit risk modeling’s more utilized applications.
When it comes to credit risk models, delivering the most predictive score is not the only consideration for a model’s viability. Modelers must be able to explain and detail the model’s logic, or its “thought process,” for calculating the final score. This means taking steps to ensure the model’s compliance with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, which forbids discriminatory lending practices. Federal laws also require adverse action responses to be sent by the lender if a consumer’s credit application has been declined. This requires the model must be able to highlight the top reasons for a less than optimal score.
And so, while ML may be able to deliver the best predictive accuracy, its ability to explain how the results are generated has always been a concern. ML has been stigmatized as a “black box,” where data mysteriously gets transformed into the final predictions without a clear explanation of how. However, this is changing.
Depending on the ML algorithm applied to credit risk modeling, we’ve found risk models can offer the same transparency as more traditional methods such as logistic regression. For example, gradient boosting machines (GBMs) are designed as a predictive model built from a sequence of several decision tree submodels. The very nature of GBMs’ decision tree design allows statisticians to explain the logic behind the model’s predictive behavior. We believe model governance teams and regulators in the United States may become comfortable with this approach more quickly than with deep learning or neural network algorithms. Since GBMs are represented as sets of decision trees that can be explained, while neural networks are represented as long sets of cryptic numbers that are much harder to document, manage and understand.
In future blog posts, we’ll discuss the GBM algorithm in more detail and how we’re using its predictability and transparency to maximize credit risk decisioning for our clients.