ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2025
Deep learning for enhanced risk management: a novel approach to analyzing financial reports.
Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Risk management is a critical component of today's financial environment because of the enormity and complexity of data contained in financial statements. Business situations, plans, and schedule risk assessment with the help of conventional ways which involve analytical, technical, and heuristic models are inadequate to address the complex structures of the latest data. This research brings out the Hybrid Financial Risk Predictor (HFRP) model, using the convolutional neural networks (CNN) and long-short term memory (LSTM) networks to improve financial risk prediction. A combination of quantitative and qualitative ratings derived from the analysis of financial texts results in high accuracy and stability compared with the HFRP model. Evaluating key findings, the quantity of training & testing loss decreased considerably and they have their final value as 0.0013 and 0.003, respectively. According to the hypothesis, the selected HFRP model demonstrates the values of the revenue, net income, and earnings per share (EPS), and are closely similar to the actual values. The model achieves substantial risk mitigation: credit risk lowered from 0.75 to 0.20, liquidity risk from 0.70 to 0.25, market risk from 0.65 to 0.30, while operational risk is at 0.80 to 0.35. By analyzing the results of the HFRP model, it can be stated that the proposal promotes improved financial stability and presents a reliable model for the contemporary financial markets, which in turn helps in making sound decisions and improve the assessment of 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.