This study aimed to investigate the perspectives of supervisory authorities and regulated entities on the application of explainable artificial intelligence (xAI) in the financial sector. The research focused on three use cases: consumer credit, credit risk, and anti-money laundering. Semi-structured interviews were conducted at three banks and two supervisory authorities in the Netherlands to gather data. The data analysis involved creating a list of main findings and conclusions per interview which were verified and supplemented by the interviewees. An overview of the main conclusions was developed by analyzing all interview reports. These conclusions were discussed in a plenary session with participants from both supervisory authorities and banks to refine the final conclusions. Regarding consumer credit, one bank used an AI system based on logistic regression to assess mortgages with traffic-light colors for middle office employees. The primary users of this AI system were not given detailed insight into its functioning and results to prevent potential gaming of the system; however, due to its relative interpretability, explainability to other stakeholders was not considered challenging beyond previous systems. Another bank supplemented its traditional loan approval system for consumer credit with an AI system that uses transactional data resulting in fewer defaults on loans. Model developers are essential stakeholders regarding explainability as it would be possible from a technological point of view to explain the model to customers; however, this requires understanding which type of narratives would be comprehensible by different consumer groups. One supervisory authority monitors whether lenders comply with lending standards limiting loan amounts depending on their financial situation. Regardless of what an AI system indicates, banks must conform to these standards as they ensure that lending consumers are protected; however, within these standards banks might use AI systems to find cases their traditional systems would not give credit but determine as profitable for them which might not always be good for consumers. Overall findings indicate that there is a disparity between supervisory authorities and banks regarding desired scope of explainability of AI systems for investigated use cases; thus clear differentiation between technical AI (model) explainability requirements and explainability requirements of broader AI system in relation to applicable laws and regulations could benefit financial sector.
- - The study investigated the perspectives of supervisory authorities and regulated entities on the application of explainable artificial intelligence (xAI) in the financial sector.
- - The research focused on three use cases: consumer credit, credit risk, and anti-money laundering.
- - Semi-structured interviews were conducted at three banks and two supervisory authorities in the Netherlands to gather data.
- - Regarding consumer credit, one bank used an AI system based on logistic regression to assess mortgages with traffic-light colors for middle office employees. Another bank supplemented its traditional loan approval system for consumer credit with an AI system that uses transactional data resulting in fewer defaults on loans.
- - One supervisory authority monitors whether lenders comply with lending standards limiting loan amounts depending on their financial situation. Regardless of what an AI system indicates, banks must conform to these standards as they ensure that lending consumers are protected; however, within these standards banks might use AI systems to find cases their traditional systems would not give credit but determine as profitable for them which might not always be good for consumers.
- - Overall findings indicate that there is a disparity between supervisory authorities and banks regarding desired scope of explainability of AI systems for investigated use cases; thus clear differentiation between technical AI (model) explainability requirements and explainability requirements of broader AI system in relation to applicable laws and regulations could benefit financial sector.
The study looked at how computers can help banks make decisions about loans and stopping bad people from using the bank. They talked to people who work at banks and people who check that banks are doing things right. They studied three different ways that computers can help with loans and stopping bad people. One bank used a computer to help decide if someone should get a loan, another bank used a computer to check if someone might not be able to pay back their loan, and one group checked that the banks were following rules about how much money they could lend. The study found that some people think the computers should explain why they made their decision better than they do now so everyone can understand.
Definitions- Explainable Artificial Intelligence (xAI): A type of computer system that can explain how it made its decision.
- Consumer credit: When someone borrows money from a bank or other lender.
- Credit risk: How likely it is that someone will not be able to pay back what they borrowed.
- Anti-money laundering: Stopping bad people from using the bank for illegal things like stealing money or buying drugs.
- Supervisory authorities: People who check that banks are doing things right and following rules.
Explainable Artificial Intelligence in the Financial Sector: An Overview of Perspectives from Supervisory Authorities and Regulated Entities
The financial sector is one of the most rapidly evolving industries, with new technologies being developed to improve efficiency and accuracy. One such technology is explainable artificial intelligence (xAI), which has been gaining traction due to its potential to provide more transparent decision-making processes. This study aimed to investigate the perspectives of supervisory authorities and regulated entities on the application of xAI in the financial sector by focusing on three use cases: consumer credit, credit risk, and anti-money laundering.
Methodology
Semi-structured interviews were conducted at three banks and two supervisory authorities in the Netherlands to gather data. The data analysis involved creating a list of main findings and conclusions per interview which were verified and supplemented by the interviewees. An overview of the main conclusions was developed by analyzing all interview reports. These conclusions were discussed in a plenary session with participants from both supervisory authorities and banks to refine the final conclusions.
Consumer Credit Use Case
One bank used an AI system based on logistic regression to assess mortgages with traffic-light colors for middle office employees. The primary users of this AI system were not given detailed insight into its functioning and results to prevent potential gaming of the system; however, due to its relative interpretability, explainability to other stakeholders was not considered challenging beyond previous systems. Another bank supplemented its traditional loan approval system for consumer credit with an AI system that uses transactional data resulting in fewer defaults on loans. Model developers are essential stakeholders regarding explainability as it would be possible from a technological point of view to explain the model to customers; however, this requires understanding which type of narratives would be comprehensible by different consumer groups.
Credit Risk Use Case
One supervisory authority monitors whether lenders comply with lending standards limiting loan amounts depending on their financial situation. Regardless of what an AI system indicates, banks must conform to these standards as they ensure that lending consumers are protected; however, within these standards banks might use AI systems to find cases their traditional systems would not give credit but determine as profitable for them which might not always be good for consumers.
Conclusion
Overall findings indicate that there is a disparity between supervisory authorities and banks regarding desired scope of explainability of AI systems for investigated use cases; thus clear differentiation between technical AI (model) explainability requirements and explainability requirements of broader AI system in relation