Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3357384.3358052acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescikmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Understanding Default Behavior in Online Lending

Published: 03 November 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Microcredit, very small loans given out without any collaterals, is a new form of financial instrument that serves the segment of population that are typically underserved by traditional financial services. When microcredit takes the form of lending over the internet, it has the advantage of easy online application process and fast funding for borrowers, as well as attractive rate of return for individual lenders. For platforms that facilitate such activities, the key challenge lies in risk management, i.e. adequately pricing each loan's risk so as to balance borrowers' lending cost and lenders' risk-adjusted return. In fact, identifying default borrowers is of critical importance for the ecosystem. Traditionally, credit risk depends heavily on borrowers' historical loan records. However, most borrowers do not have any bureau history, and therefore cannot provide sufficient loan records. In this paper, we study default prediction in online lending by using social behavior. Specifically, we based our work on a dataset provided by PPDai, one of the leading platforms in China. Our dataset consists of over 11 million users and more than 1.5 billion call logs between them. We establish a mobile network and explore social factors that predict borrowers' default. Based on this, we focused on cheating agents, who recruit and teach borrowers to cheat by providing false information and faking application materials. Cheating agents represent a type of default, especially detrimental to the system. We propose a novel probabilistic framework to identify default borrowers and cheating agents simultaneously. Experimental results on production dataset demonstrate significant improvement over several baseline methods. Moreover, our model can effectively identify cheating agents without any labels.

References

[1]
Leman Akoglu, Rishi Chandy, and Christos Faloutsos. 2013. Opinion Fraud Detection in Online Reviews by Network Effects. ICWSM 13 (2013), 2--11.
[2]
Leman Akoglu and Christos Faloutsos. 2010. Event detection in time series of mobile communication graphs. In Army science conference. 77--79.
[3]
Leman Akoglu, Mary McGlohon, and Christos Faloutsos. 2010. Oddball:Spotting anomalies in weighted graphs. In PAKDD'10. Springer, 410--421.
[4]
Arash Bahrammirzaee. 2010. A comparative survey of artificial intelligence applications in finance: artificial neural networks, expert system and hybrid intelligent systems. Neural Computing and Applications 19, 8 (2010), 1165--1195.
[5]
Richard J Bolton and David J Hand. 2002. Statistical fraud detection: A review. Statistical science (2002), 235--249.
[6]
Horst Bunke, Peter J Dickinson, Miro Kraetzl, and Walter D Wallis. 2007. A graph-theoretic approach to enterprise network dynamics. Vol. 24. Springer Science & Business Media.
[7]
Ajay Byanjankar, Markku Heikkila, and Jozsef Mezei. 2015. Predicting Credit Risk in Peer-to-Peer Lending: A Neural Network Approach. IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (2015).
[8]
Andrew T Carswell and Douglas C Bachtel. 2009. Mortgage fraud: A risk factor analysis of affected communities. Crime, law and social change 52, 4 (2009), 347--364.
[9]
Chuang-Cheng Chiu and Chieh-Yuan Tsai. 2004. A web services-based collaborative scheme for credit card fraud detection. In e-Technology, e-Commerce and e-Service, 2004. EEE'04. 2004 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 177--181.
[10]
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'14. 15--24.
[11]
Jing Gao, Feng Liang, Wei Fan, Chi Wang, Yizhou Sun, and Jiawei Han. 2010. On community outliers and their efficient detection in information networks. In KDD'10. ACM, 813--822.
[12]
John M Hammersley and Peter Clifford. 1971. Markov fields on finite graphs and lattices. Unpublished manuscript (1971).
[13]
Bryan Hooi, Hyun Ah Song, Alex Beutel, Neil Shah, Kijung Shin, and Christos Faloutsos. 2016. FRAUDAR: Bounding Graph Fraud in the Face of Camouflage. In KDD'16. 895--904.
[14]
Tsuyoshi Ide and Hisashi Kashima. 2004. Eigenspace-based anomaly detection in computer systems. In KDD'04. ACM, 440--449.
[15]
Frank R Kschischang, Brendan J Frey, and H-A Loeliger. 2001. Factor graphs and the sum-product algorithm. Information Theory, IEEE Transactions on 47, 2 (2001), 498--519.
[16]
Tian-Shyug Lee and I-Fei Chen. 2005. A two-stage hybrid credit scoring model using artificial neural networks and multivariate adaptive regression splines. Expert Systems with Applications 28, 4 (2005), 743--752.
[17]
Rashmi Malhotra and Davinder K Malhotra. 2003. Evaluating consumer loans using neural networks. Omega 31, 2 (2003), 83--96.
[18]
Emmanuel Muller, Patricia Iglesias Sanchez, Yvonne Mulle, and Klemens Bohm. 2013. Ranking outlier nodes in subspaces of attributed graphs. In Data Engineering Workshops (ICDEW), 2013 IEEE 29th International Conference on. IEEE, 216--222.
[19]
Kevin P Murphy, Yair Weiss, and Michael I Jordan. 1999. Loopy belief propagation for approximate inference: An empirical study. In UAI'99. 467--475.
[20]
Lawrence Page, Sergey Brin, Rajeev Motwani, and Terry Winograd. 1999. The PageRank Citation Ranking: Bringing Order to the Web. Technical Report SIDL-WP-1999-0120. Stanford University.
[21]
Mitchell A Peabody. 2002. Finding groups of graphs in databases. Ph.D.Dissertation. Drexel University.
[22]
Bryan Perozzi, Leman Akoglu,Patricia Iglesias Sanchez, and Emmanuel Muller. 2014. Focused clustering and outlier detection in large attributed graphs. In KDD'14. ACM, 1346--1355.
[23]
Bryan Perozzi,Rami Al-Rfou, and Steven Skiena.2014.Deepwalk:Online learning of social representations. In KDD'14. 701--710.
[24]
S Benson Edwin Raj and A Annie Portia. 2011. Analysis on credit card fraud detection methods. In Computer, Communication and Electrical Technology (ICC-CET), 2011 International Conference on. 152--156.
[25]
Peter Shoubridge, Miro Kraetzl, WAL Wallis, and Horst Bunke. 2002. Detection of abnormal change in a time series of graphs. Journal of Interconnection Net- works 3, 01n02 (2002), 85--101.
[26]
H Lookman Sithic and T Balasubramanian. 2013. Survey of insurance fraud detection using data mining techniques. arXiv preprint arXiv:1309.0806 (2013).
[27]
Jimeng Sun, Christos Faloutsos, Spiros Papadimitriou, and Philip S Yu. 2007. Graphscope: parameter-free mining of large time-evolving graphs. In KDD'07. ACM, 687--696.
[28]
Jimeng Sun,Yinglian Xie,Hui Zhang, and Christos Faloutsos.2008.Lessismore: Sparse graph mining with compact matrix decomposition. Statistical Analysis and Data Mining: The ASA Data Science Journal 1, 1 (2008), 6--22.
[29]
Zhe Sun, Marco A Wiering, and Nicolai Petkov. 2014. Classification system for mortgage arrear management. In Computational Intelligence for Financial Engi- neering & Economics (CIFEr), 2104 IEEE Conference on. 489--496.
[30]
Shiguo Wang. 2010. A comprehensive survey of data mining-based accounting-fraud detection research. In Intelligent Computation Technology and Automation (ICICTA), 2010 International Conference on, Vol. 1. IEEE, 50--53.
[31]
Yang Yang,Zongtao Liu,Chenhao Tan,Fei Wu,Yueting Zhuang, and Yafeng Li. 2018. To Stay or to Leave: Churn Prediction for Urban Migrants in the Initial Period. In Proceedings of WWW.
[32]
Yang Yang, Chenhao Tan, Zongtao Liu, Fei Wu, and Yueting Zhuang. 2018. Urban Dreams of Migrants: A Case Study of Migrant Integration in Shanghai. In AAAI'18.
[33]
Yang Yang,Yuhong Xu,Yizhou Sun,Yuxiao Dong,Fei Wu,and Yueting Zhuang. 2019. Mining Fraudsters and Fraudulent Strategies in Large-Scale Mobile Social Networks. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering (2019).
[34]
Jonathan S Yedidia, William T Freeman, and Yair Weiss. 2003. Understanding belief propagation and its generalizations. Exploring artificial intelligence in the new millennium 8 (2003), 236--239.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)DualGAD: Dual-Bootstrapped Self-Supervised Learning for Graph Anomaly DetectionInformation Sciences10.1016/j.ins.2024.120520(120520)Online publication date: Mar-2024
  • (2023)Enabling Fraud Prediction on Preliminary Data Through Information Density BoosterIEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security10.1109/TIFS.2023.330052318(5706-5720)Online publication date: 2023
  • (2023)Fraud-Agents Detection in Online Microfinance: A Large-Scale Empirical StudyIEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing10.1109/TDSC.2022.315113220:2(1169-1185)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Understanding Default Behavior in Online Lending

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    CIKM '19: Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management
    November 2019
    3373 pages
    ISBN:9781450369763
    DOI:10.1145/3357384
    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]

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 03 November 2019

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. anomaly detection
    2. online lending
    3. social network

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Funding Sources

    • the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
    • Chinese Knowledge Center of Engineering Science and Technology (CKCEST)

    Conference

    CIKM '19
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    CIKM '19 Paper Acceptance Rate 202 of 1,031 submissions, 20%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 1,861 of 8,427 submissions, 22%

    Upcoming Conference

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)20
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
    Reflects downloads up to 30 Sep 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)DualGAD: Dual-Bootstrapped Self-Supervised Learning for Graph Anomaly DetectionInformation Sciences10.1016/j.ins.2024.120520(120520)Online publication date: Mar-2024
    • (2023)Enabling Fraud Prediction on Preliminary Data Through Information Density BoosterIEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security10.1109/TIFS.2023.330052318(5706-5720)Online publication date: 2023
    • (2023)Fraud-Agents Detection in Online Microfinance: A Large-Scale Empirical StudyIEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing10.1109/TDSC.2022.315113220:2(1169-1185)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2023
    • (2021)Network Embedding via MotifsACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data10.1145/347391116:3(1-20)Online publication date: 22-Oct-2021
    • (2021)Financial Fraud Detection on Micro-credit Loan Scenario via Fuller Location Information EmbeddingCompanion Proceedings of the Web Conference 202110.1145/3442442.3451372(238-246)Online publication date: 19-Apr-2021
    • (2021)NetRL: Task-aware Network Denoising via Deep Reinforcement LearningIEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering10.1109/TKDE.2021.3091022(1-1)Online publication date: 2021

    View Options

    Get Access

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media