SynthesisPloS one2024
Machine learning in internet financial risk management: A systematic literature review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep learning for enhanced risk management: a novel approach to analyzing financial reports.PeerJ. Computer science · 2025Article
- Correction: Machine learning in internet financial risk management: A systematic literature review.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Internet finance has permeated into myriad households, bringing about lifestyle convenience alongside potential risks. Presently, internet finance enterprises are progressively adopting machine learning and other artificial intelligence methods for risk alertness. What is the current status of the application of various machine learning models and algorithms across different institutions? Is there an optimal machine learning algorithm suited for the majority of internet finance platforms and application scenarios? Scholars have embarked on a series of studies addressing these questions; however, the focus predominantly lies in comparing different algorithms within specific platforms and contexts, lacking a comprehensive discourse and summary on the utilization of machine learning in this domain. Thus, based on the data from Web of Science and Scopus databases, this paper conducts a systematic literature review on all aspects of machine learning in internet finance risk in recent years, based on publications trends, geographical distribution, literature focus, machine learning models and algorithms, and evaluations. The research reveals that machine learning, as a nascent technology, whether through basic algorithms or intricate algorithmic combinations, has made significant strides compared to traditional credit scoring methods in predicting accuracy, time efficiency, and robustness in internet finance risk management. Nonetheless, there exist noticeable disparities among different algorithms, and factors such as model structure, sample data, and parameter settings also influence prediction accuracy, although generally, updated algorithms tend to achieve higher accuracy. Consequently, there is no one-size-fits-all approach applicable to all platforms; each platform should enhance its machine learning models and algorithms based on its unique characteristics, data, and the development of AI technology, starting from key evaluation indicators to mitigate internet finance risks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.