| Literature DB >> 36193407 |
Abstract
Financial innovations emerge in an endless stream, and it is difficult for the regulatory measures and efforts of banks in various countries and the credit risk management level of commercial banks themselves to adapt to the increasingly complex risk environment faced by banks. In the process of building GFR (green financial risk) mixed governance model, the division of powers and responsibilities of governance subjects should be effectively defined. Therefore, it is very necessary to comprehensively and systematically study and grasp the characteristics, performance, and causes of commercial banks' GFR and build an early-warning model of commercial banks' GFR to comprehensively monitor the risks of banks, so as to reduce risks and avoid crises. Therefore, this paper uses the forward three-layer BPNN (BP neural network) technology to establish a real-time warning model of commercial banks' GFR. IL (input layer) to HL (hidden layer) adopts Sigmoid function, while HL to OL (output layer) function adopts linear function Purelin function. The results show that the test result of this method is greatly improved compared with the traditional method, and the correct rate is increased from 81.27% to 94.38%. It shows that the model in this paper has achieved a good warning effect of GFR for commercial banks.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36193407 PMCID: PMC9526570 DOI: 10.1155/2022/4613088
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Environ Public Health ISSN: 1687-9805
Figure 1Schematic diagram of GFR index structure of commercial banks.
Figure 2BPNN structure.
Figure 3GFR early warning system model of BPNN commercial bank.
Selection of OL number.
| OL number | Network training error | Training steps |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.2673 | 99 |
| 2 | 0.1709 | 63 |
| 3 | 0.254 | 70 |
| 4 | 0.2898 | 113 |
| 5 | 0.2772 | 64 |
| 6 | 0.2902 | 112 |
| 7 | 0.2767 | 91 |
| 8 | 0.2061 | 86 |
| 9 | 0.138 | 135 |
| 10 | 0.2557 | 128 |
| 11 | 0.0504 | 95 |
| 12 | 0.3032 | 48 |
| 13 | 0.2831 | 78 |
| 14 | 0.2516 | 90 |
| 15 | 0.2128 | 114 |
Figure 4Network training error.
Comparison between comprehensive evaluation by experts and actual output value of corresponding BPNN.
| Sample | Expected output | Actual output |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2.0203 | 2.0207 |
| 2 | 2.0206 | 2.0202 |
| 3 | 2.0203 | 2.0207 |
| 4 | 2.0201 | 2.021 |
| 5 | 2.0205 | 2.0204 |
| 6 | 2.0204 | 2.0206 |
| 7 | 2.0205 | 2.0202 |
| 8 | 2.0203 | 2.02 |
| 9 | 2.0201 | 2.021 |
| 10 | 2.0208 | 2.02 |
Figure 5Comparison chart of output values.
Figure 6Training times and the changing trend of RMSE.
Figure 7Optimal learning rate chart.
Figure 8Algorithm test results.