skip to main content
research-article

From Footprint to Evidence: An Exploratory Study of Mining Social Data for Credit Scoring

Authors Info & Claims
Published:15 December 2016Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

With the booming popularity of online social networks like Twitter and Weibo, online user footprints are accumulating rapidly on the social web. Simultaneously, the question of how to leverage the large-scale user-generated social media data for personal credit scoring comes into the sight of both researchers and practitioners. It has also become a topic of great importance and growing interest in the P2P lending industry. However, compared with traditional financial data, heterogeneous social data presents both opportunities and challenges for personal credit scoring. In this article, we seek a deep understanding of how to learn users’ credit labels from social data in a comprehensive and efficient way. Particularly, we explore the social-data-based credit scoring problem under the micro-blogging setting for its open, simple, and real-time nature. To identify credit-related evidence hidden in social data, we choose to conduct an analytical and empirical study on a large-scale dataset from Weibo, the largest and most popular tweet-style website in China. Summarizing results from existing credit scoring literature, we first propose three social-data-based credit scoring principles as guidelines for in-depth exploration. In addition, we glean six credit-related insights arising from empirical observations of the testbed dataset. Based on the proposed principles and insights, we extract prediction features mainly from three categories of users’ social data, including demographics, tweets, and networks. To harness this broad range of features, we put forward a two-tier stacking and boosting enhanced ensemble learning framework. Quantitative investigation of the extracted features shows that online social media data does have good potential in discriminating good credit users from bad. Furthermore, we perform experiments on the real-world Weibo dataset consisting of more than 7.3 million tweets and 200,000 users whose credit labels are known through our third-party partner. Experimental results show that (i) our approach achieves a roughly 0.625 AUC value with all the proposed social features as input, and (ii) our learning algorithm can outperform traditional credit scoring methods by as much as 17% for social-data-based personal credit scoring.

References

  1. William Adams, Liran Einav, and Jonathan Levin. 2007. Liquidity Constraints and Imperfect Information in Subprime Lending. Technical Report. National Bureau of Economic Research.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Sumit Agarwal, John C. Driscoll, Xavier Gabaix, and David Laibson. 2008. Learning in the Credit Card Market. Technical Report. National Bureau of Economic Research.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Sumit Agarwal, Paige M. Skiba, and Jeremy Tobacman. 2009. Payday Loans and Credit Cards: New Liquidity and Credit Scoring Puzzles? Technical Report. National Bureau of Economic Research.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Gerhard Arminger, Daniel Enache, and Thorsten Bonne. 1997. Analyzing credit risk data: A comparison of logistic discrimination, classification tree analysis, and feedforward networks. Computational Statistics 12, 2 (1997).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Alexander Bachmann, Alexander Becker, Daniel Buerckner, Michel Hilker, Frank Kock, Mark Lehmann, Phillip Tiburtius, and Burkhardt Funk. 2011. Online peer-to-peer lending -- a literature review. Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce 16, 2 (2011), 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Lars Backstrom, Eric Sun, and Cameron Marlow. 2010. Find me if you can: Improving geographical prediction with social and spatial proximity. In WWW. 61--70. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Bart Baesens, Tony Van Gestel, Stijn Viaene, Maria Stepanova, Johan Suykens, and Jan Vanthienen. 2003. Benchmarking state-of-the-art classification algorithms for credit scoring. Journal of the Operational Research Society 54, 6 (2003), 627--635.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Shane Bergsma and Benjamin Van Durme. 2013. Using conceptual class attributes to characterize social media users. ACL (1). 710--720.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. David M. Blei, Andrew Y. Ng, and Michael I. Jordan. 2003. Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research 3 (2003), 993--1022. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Andreas Blochlinger and Markus Leippold. 2006. Economic benefit of powerful credit scoring. Journal of Banking and Finance 30, 3 (2006), 851--873.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Johan Bollen, Huina Mao, and Xiaojun Zeng. 2011. Twitter mood predicts the stock market. Journal of Computational Science 2, 1 (2011), 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Danah Boyd and Kate Crawford. 2012. Critical questions for big data: Provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Information, Communication 8 Society 15, 5 (2012), 662--679.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Andrew P. Bradley. 1997. The use of the area under the ROC curve in the evaluation of machine learning algorithms. Pattern Recognition 30, 7 (1997), 1145--1159. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Leo Breiman. 2001. Random forests. Machine Learning 45, 1 (2001), 5--32. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. John D. Burger, John C. Henderson, George Kim, and Guido Zarrella. 2011. Discriminating gender on twitter. In EMNLP. 1301--1309. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Moses S. Charikar. 2002. Similarity estimation techniques from rounding algorithms. In STOC. ACM, 380--388. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Satyajit Chatterjee, Dean Corbae, Makoto Nakajima, and José-Víctor Ríos-Rull. 2007. A quantitative theory of unsecured consumer credit with risk of default. Econometrica 75, 6 (2007), 1525--1589.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Nitesh V. Chawla, Kevin W. Bowyer, Lawrence O. Hall, and W. Philip Kegelmeyer. 2002. SMOTE: Synthetic minority over-sampling technique. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (2002), 321--357. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Xihui Chen, Jun Pang, and Ran Xue. 2014a. Constructing and comparing user mobility profiles. ACM Transactions on the Web 8, 4, Article 21 (Nov. 2014), 25 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Zhuohua Chen, Feida Zhu, Guangming Guo, and Hongyan Liu. 2014b. User profiling via affinity-aware friendship network. In Social Informatics. Springer, 151--165.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Zhiyuan Cheng, James Caverlee, and Kyumin Lee. 2010. You are where you tweet: A content-based approach to geo-locating twitter users. In CIKM. 759--768. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Jonathan N. Crook, David B. Edelman, and Lyn C. Thomas. 2007. Recent developments in consumer credit risk assessment. European Journal of Operational Research 183, 3 (2007), 1447--1465.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Yuxiao Dong, Yang Yang, Jie Tang, Yang Yang, and Nitesh V. Chawla. 2014. Inferring user demographics and social strategies in mobile social networks. In KDD. 15--24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Liran Einav, Mark Jenkins, and Jonathan Levin. 2013. The impact of credit scoring on consumer lending. The RAND Journal of Economics 44, 2 (2013), 249--274.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Robert A. Eisenbeis. 1978. Problems in applying discriminant analysis in credit scoring models. Journal of Banking 8 Finance 2, 3 (1978), 205--219.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Clayton Fink, Jonathon Kopecky, and Maksym Morawski. 2012. Inferring gender from the content of tweets: A region specific example. In ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Jerome H. Friedman. 2001. Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine. Annals of Statistics (2001), 1189--1232.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Halina Frydman, Jarl G. Kallberg, and Duen-Li Kao. 1985. Testing the adequacy of Markov chain and mover-stayer models as representations of credit behavior. Operations Research 33, 6 (1985), 1203--1214. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Hongyu Gao, Jun Hu, Christo Wilson, Zhichun Li, Yan Chen, and Ben Y. Zhao. 2010. Detecting and characterizing social spam campaigns. In IMC. ACM, 35--47. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Elizabeth M. Gerber and Julie Hui. 2013. Crowdfunding: Motivations and deterrents for participation. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 20, 6 (2013), 34. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Sumit Goswami, Sudeshna Sarkar, and Mayur Rustagi. 2009. Stylometric analysis of bloggers’ age and gender. In ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Thomas L. Griffiths and Mark Steyvers. 2004. Finding scientific topics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 101, suppl 1 (2004), 5228--5235.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Guangming Guo, Feida Zhu, Enhong Chen, Le Wu, Qi Liu, Yingling Liu, and Minghui Qiu. 2016. Personal credit profiling via latent user behavior dimensions on social media. In PAKDD 2016. 130--142. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Mark Hall, Eibe Frank, Geoffrey Holmes, Bernhard Pfahringer, Peter Reutemann, and Ian H. Witten. 2009. The WEKA data mining software: An update. SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter 11, 1 (Nov. 2009), 10--18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. David J. Hand and William E. Henley. 1997. Statistical classification methods in consumer credit scoring: A review. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 160, 3 (1997), 523--541.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Terry Harris. 2013. Default definition selection for credit scoring. Artificial Intelligence Research 2, 4 (2013), p49.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Terry Harris. 2015. Credit scoring using the clustered support vector machine. Expert Systems with Applications 42, 2 (2015), 741--750. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. W. E. Henley and David J. Hand. 1996. A k-nearest-neighbour classifier for assessing consumer credit risk. The Statistician (1996), 77--95.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Liangjie Hong and Brian D. Davison. 2010. Empirical study of topic modeling in twitter. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Social Media Analytics. ACM, 80--88. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Nan-Chen Hsieh and Lun-Ping Hung. 2010. A data driven ensemble classifier for credit scoring analysis. Expert Systems with Applications 37, 1 (2010), 534--545. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Wen Hua, Zhongyuan Wang, Haixun Wang, Kai Zheng, and Xiaofang Zhou. 2015. Short text understanding through lexical-semantic analysis. In ICDE. 495--506.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Cheng-Lung Huang, Mu-Chen Chen, and Chieh-Jen Wang. 2007. Credit scoring with a data mining approach based on support vector machines. Expert Systems with Applications 33, 4 (2007), 847--856. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Michael K. Hulme and Collette Wright. 2006. Internet based social lending: Past, present and future. Social Futures Observatory 11 (2006), 1--115.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Akshay Java, Xiaodan Song, Tim Finin, and Belle L. Tseng. 2007. Why we twitter: An analysis of a microblogging community. In WebKDD/SNA-KDD. 118--138. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Herbert L. Jensen. 1992. Using neural networks for credit scoring. Managerial Finance 18, 6 (1992), 15--26.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Dean Karlan and Jonathan Zinman. 2009. Observing unobservables: Identifying information asymmetries with a consumer credit field experiment. Econometrica 77, 6 (2009), 1993--2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. David Kempe, Jon Kleinberg, and Éva Tardos. 2003. Maximizing the spread of influence through a social network. In KDD. ACM, 137--146. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Vaclav Kozeny. 2015. Genetic algorithms for credit scoring. Expert Systems with Applications 42, 6 (April 2015), 2998--3004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Jochen Kruppa, Alexandra Schwarz, Gerhard Arminger, and Andreas Ziegler. 2013. Consumer credit risk: Individual probability estimates using machine learning. Expert Systems with Applications 40, 13 (2013), 5125--5131.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Rui Li and Chi Wang Kevin Chen-Chuan Chang. 2014. User profiling in an ego network: Co-profiling attributes and relationships. In WWW. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Rui Li, Shengjie Wang, Hongbo Deng, Rui Wang, and Kevin Chen-Chuan Chang. 2012. Towards social user profiling: Unified and discriminative influence model for inferring home locations. In KDD. 1023--1031. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Brian W. Matthews. 1975. Comparison of the predicted and observed secondary structure of T4 phage lysozyme. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA)-Protein Structure 405, 2 (1975), 442--451.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. Alan Mislove, Bimal Viswanath, P. Krishna Gummadi, and Peter Druschel. 2010. You are who you know: Inferring user profiles in online social networks. In WSDM. 251--260. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Ethan Mollick. 2014. The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing 29, 1 (2014), 1--16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Dong Nguyen, Rilana Gravel, Dolf Trieschnigg, and Theo Meder. 2013. “How old do you think I am?” A study of language and age in twitter. In ICWSM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Chorng-Shyong Ong, Jih-Jeng Huang, and Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng. 2005. Building credit scoring models using genetic programming. Expert Systems with Applications 29, 1 (2005), 41--47. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Michael J. Paul and Mark Dredze. 2011. You are what you tweet: Analyzing twitter for public health. In ICWSM. 265--272.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Claudia Peersman, Walter Daelemans, and Leona Van Vaerenbergh. 2011. Predicting age and gender in online social networks. In SMUC. 37--44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Marco Pennacchiotti and Ana-Maria Popescu. 2011. Democrats, Republicans and Starbucks afficionados: User classification in twitter. In KDD. 430--438. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Delip Rao, David Yarowsky, Abhishek Shreevats, and Manaswi Gupta. 2010. Classifying latent user attributes in twitter. In SMUC. 37--44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. Lior Rokach. 2010. Ensemble-based classifiers. Artificial Intelligence Review 33, 1--2 (2010), 1--39. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. Eric Rosenberg and Alan Gleit. 1994. Quantitative methods in credit management: A survey. Operations Research 42, 4 (1994), 589--613. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Sara Rosenthal and Kathleen McKeown. 2011. Age prediction in blogs: A study of style, content, and online behavior in pre- and post-social media generations. In ACL. 763--772. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  64. Takeshi Sakaki, Makoto Okazaki, and Yutaka Matsuo. 2010. Earthquake shakes Twitter users: Real-time event detection by social sensors. In WWW. ACM, 851--860. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  65. Klaus B. Schebesch and Ralf Stecking. 2005. Support vector machines for classifying and describing credit applicants: Detecting typical and critical regions. Journal of the Operational Research Society 56, 9 (2005), 1082--1088.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  66. Lyn C. Thomas, David B. Edelman, and Jonathan N. Crook. 2002. Credit Scoring and Its Applications. SIAM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  67. Lita van Wel and Lambèr Royakkers. 2004. Ethical issues in web data mining. Ethics and Information Technology 6, 2 (2004), 129--140. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  68. Annette Vissing-Jorgensen. 2011. Consumer credit: Learning your customer’s default risk from what (s)he buys. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2023238 (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. John C. Wiginton. 1980. A note on the comparison of logit and discriminant models of consumer credit behavior. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 15, 03 (1980), 757--770.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  70. Bing Xiang and Liang Zhou. 2014. Improving twitter sentiment analysis with topic-based mixture modeling and semi-supervised training. In ACL. 434--439.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. Bee Wah Yap, Seng Huat Ong, and Nor Huselina Mohamed Husain. 2011. Using data mining to improve assessment of credit worthiness via credit scoring models. Expert Systems and Applications 38, 10 (2011), 13274--13283. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  72. Guangxiang Zeng, Ping Luo, Enhong Chen, and Min Wang. 2013. From social user activities to people affiliation. In ICDM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Hongke Zhao, Qi Liu, Guifeng Wang, Yong Ge, and Enhong Chen. 2016. Portfolio selections in P2P lending: A multi-objective perspective. In KDD (KDD’16). ACM, 2075--2084. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  74. Yuan Zhong, Nicholas Jing Yuan, Wen Zhong, Fuzheng Zhang, and Xing Xie. 2015. You are where you go: Inferring demographic attributes from location check-ins. In WSDM. 295--304. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. From Footprint to Evidence: An Exploratory Study of Mining Social Data for Credit Scoring

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM Transactions on the Web
          ACM Transactions on the Web  Volume 10, Issue 4
          December 2016
          169 pages
          ISSN:1559-1131
          EISSN:1559-114X
          DOI:10.1145/3017848
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2016 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 15 December 2016
          • Accepted: 1 September 2016
          • Revised: 1 June 2016
          • Received: 1 December 2015
          Published in tweb Volume 10, Issue 4

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader