Ranking Prior Alignment for Credit Risk Modeling: When Do External Priors Matter?
Mirrored from arXiv — Machine Learning for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Machine Learning
Title:Ranking Prior Alignment for Credit Risk Modeling: When Do External Priors Matter?
Abstract:Cold-start credit scoring -- deploying models with scarce labeled data, weak features, or minimal capacity -- is a recurring problem in financial machine learning. When a new lending product launches, labeled default data is scarce, feature pipelines are immature, and models must be deployed with minimal capacity to avoid overfitting. Standard defenses operate on the same limited data; what is needed is a source of external regularization grounded in domain knowledge.
We propose Ranking Prior Alignment, a model-agnostic framework that distills external ranking priors (from domain experts, teacher models, or LLMs) into any scoring model via a temperature-scaled KL divergence loss. The framework unifies neural (MIL attention) and tree-based (XGBoost custom objective) architectures through a single formulation: L = L_task + gamma(t) * KL(P_agent || P_model), where gamma(t) follows an exponential decay schedule. The method requires no external model at inference, and its tree-based instantiation tolerates annotation noise up to eta = 0.5.
On an industrial dataset of over 1.5M merchants, MIL alignment achieves 7/7 positive evaluation cells at 3K bags (1 ID + 3 OOT + 3 degradation metrics; peak Delta AUC = +0.020 on OOT-1), and XGBoost ablation achieves 9/9 positive metrics at 300 bags. Cross-dataset validation on public Amex shows 5/5 positive folds (avg Delta AUC = +0.041). Four model families (MIL, XGBoost, LightGBM, Logistic Regression) and four teacher architectures show that the framework is both model-agnostic and prior-source-independent.
We further observe that alignment gains exhibit an inverse-scaling pattern: benefits grow as data abundance N, model capacity C, and feature quality Q decrease, helping practitioners decide when to invest in prior annotation.
| Comments: | 8 pages, 5 figures, 14 tables |
| Subjects: | Machine Learning (cs.LG) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2610.11146 [cs.LG] |
| (or arXiv:2610.11146v1 [cs.LG] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.11146
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
|
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
Additional Features
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
More from arXiv — Machine Learning
-
Algebraic Integer Quantization for Machine Learning Applications
Oct 12
-
CircuitTree: Composing Circuits into A Syllable Transcriber
Oct 12
-
Behind-the-Meter Photovoltaic Visibility from Net Smart Meters: Deployment Regimes and Operational Insights
Oct 12
-
GlucoPRISM: Protocol-Supervised Pretraining for Cross-Cohort Glucose Transfer
Oct 12
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.