A comparison of the rough sets and recursive partitioning induction approaches: an application to commercial loans

Credit scoring is the term used to describe methods utilized for classifying applicants for credit into classes of risk. This paper evaluates two induction approaches, rough sets and decision trees, as techniques for classifying credit (business) applicants. Inductive learning methods, like rough sets and decision trees, have a better knowledge representational structure than neural networks or statistical procedures because they can be used to derive production rules. If decision trees have already been used for credit granting, the rough sets approach is rarely utilized in this domain. In this paper, we use production rules obtained on a sample of 1102 business loans in order to compare the classification abilities of the two techniques. We show that decision trees obtain better results with 87.5% of good classifications with a pruned tree, against 76.7% for rough sets. However, decision trees make more type-II errors than rough sets, but fewer type-I errors.