2018 2nd International Conference on Informatics and Computational Sciences (ICICoS)

Credit Collectibility Prediction of Debtor Candidate

Using Dynamic K-Nearest Neighbor Algorithm and
Distance and Attribute Weighted
Tiara Fajrin
Department of Informatics
Faculty of Science and Mathematics,
Diponegoro University
Semarang, Indonesia
tiarafajrin30@gmail.com
Ragil Saputra
Department of Informatics
Faculty of Science and Mathematics,
Diponegoro University
Semarang, Indonesia
ragil.saputra@undip.ac.id
Indra Waspada
Department of Informatics
Faculty of Science and Mathematics,
Diponegoro University
Semarang, Indonesia
indrawaspada@undip.ac.id

Abstract—BPR Bank Jepara Artha is one of the banks that
provide loan for activist of MSME (Micro, Small and Medium
Enterprises). The activity of loaning in BPR Bank Jepara
Artha has bad loan issue that often occured especially on loan
MSME activist, therefore it needs an application to predict the
loan Collectibility of debtor applicant to minimize the issue.
This research applied one of Data Mining classification
algorithms in the application that produces output that can
serve as information sources or second opinion for the
consideration in decision making to accept or reject the loan
applicant. The algorithm that be used was Dynamic K-Nearest
Neighbor and Distance and Attribute Weighted algorithm
which is a dynamic selection of k, addition of attribute and
distance weight on k-Nearest Neighbor algorithm. The
attributes that be used to determine the prediction result are
5C (Character, Capacity, Capital, Collateral, Condition of
Economic), monthly income, debt status elsewhere, number of
dependents, age, type of commodity and business status. The
results of Dynamic K-Nearest Neighbor and Distance and
Attribute Weighted algorithm performance measurement use
historical datas of 240 old customer, the order of importance of
the attribute specified by domain expert and 10-fold Cross
Validation yield the highest accuracy of 65.83% with precision
value of 56.10% and recall value of 50% for k=3. Using weight
attribute in this algorithm performs higher accuracy, precision
and recall than the one which does not use it. The change in the
order of importance of the attributes determined by
Correlation Attribute Evaluation yield in a higher recall value
of 54.35% for k=5 than the order of importance of the
attributes determined by the domain expert.
Keywords—Loan prediction, Data Mining, Classification,
Dynamic K-Nearest Neighbor and Distance and Attribute
Weighted, Cross Validation.
I. INTRODUCTION
Credit is an effort to bring big profits, along with big
risk. Before give a credit, the bank will analyze credit to
customers to find out whether or not that customer is
eligible for credit. The valuation is based on basic principal
of giving credit which known as “5 of credit” that is
“character, capacity, capital, condition, and collateral”. In
the valuation process of credit that done by credit analyst,
sometimes have a different analysis of one and another, lead
to different decision. That old decision of giving credit, even
though have inconsistency, may be appropriate or not.
Because of that, along with the growth of credit applicant
with a different economic condition, demanding carefulness
in making decisions before give credit to customer.
With technological developments in computer and
information system, that problem can be minimized with a
computerized application to predict the credit collectibilities
of general debtor candidate. The application is developed as
information sources or second opinion and used as
consideration to make decision. With debtor’s historical
data, a data mining technique is needed to build a prediction
model that is classification.
One of Classification algorithm that usually used for
related topics of credit is k-NN [1][2][3]. It is prefereable
because of its simple computation with plausible result [4].
Just like k-NN algorithm to identifying and predict customer
is good or bad to be given a KUR (Kredit Usaha Rakyat) on
Bank BRI Unit Kaliangkrik Magelang. Data is tested for
error rates with cross validation technique. The result show
that error rate is 6.98% and accuracy is 93.023% [5]. K-NN
algorithm that used on costumer data that use vehicle loan
financial service have an accuracy of 81.46% and AUC
value is 0.984. Because AUC value is in between 0,9 and 1,
then that method is on excellent category [6].
There are many of research that focused to increase k-
NN accuracy, and one of them is in [7], that introduce an
algorithm to increase k-NN accuracy. The algorithm is
introduced as Dynamic K-Nearest Neighbor and Distance
and Attribute Weighted (DKNDAW). In that research, they
give weight to attribute and distance, and also use the
concept of dynamic k selection. DKNDAW effectivity is
tested as experimental using 36 UCI dataset with k=10 and
compared with k-NN, WAKNN, KNNDW, KNNDAW, and
DKNN. The result shows that DKNDAW is significantly
better than other method with average accuracy of 84.82%
[7].
To provide a better result, this credit Collectibility
prediction of debtor candidate application is built adopting
DKNDAW. Not all algorithm will be adopted. In [7] they
use Mutual Information to determine the attribute’s weight
from 36 UCI dataset. This research will use Rank Order
Centroid (ROC) to determine the attribute’s weight, because
there is domain expert that determine the importance of
attribute to use in this research.
Credit Collectibility that become class label in this
research are "Good" and "Bad". There are another classes
between two of them which are transition value from Good
to Bad so it is considered unnecessary to predict them.
Another reason is the amount of their data which is quite
small will cause bias on minority class.

978-1-5386-7440-6/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE

 2018 2nd International Conference on Informatics and Computational Sciences (ICICoS)
Based on the explanation above, an application will be
built to predict credit collectibilities of debtor candidate
using Dynamic K-Nearest Neighbor and Distance and
Attribute Weighted. Application that will be built is
expected to provide accurate output and become reference
for decision maker in helping to make decision.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
A. Credit
According to Article 1 point 11 UU No. 10 of 1998
formulated that “credit is the provision of money or bills
that can be addressed like that, according to loan approval or
agreement between Bank with other parties that obliging
other party to pay off their debt with certain period of time
with interest”.
In Latin, credit is called “credere”, mean “trust”. Lender
is trusting the recipient of credit that credit that have been
given will be returned as stated in the agreement. As for
recipient that mean he had given the lender trust, so he
obliged to pay off that credit as according to time period [8].
B. Basics of Giving Credit
Before giving credit, the bank must make credit
assessment correctly and seriously first to gain confidence
about their customer. Assessing criterias, aspects, and
measures determined have become standard to evaluate by
every financial institution [8].
The standard is based on provisions at Article 8
paragraph (1) and (2) of law number 10 of 1998 which is the
basis of bank to give credit to its debtor. To prevent credit
problem, usually used assessing criteria in bank to get a
customer that can be given credit is used with 5C analysis
Character, Capacity, Capital, Condition of Economy, and
Collateral [9].
C. Credit Classification
Credit classification is a term used to indicate credit
classification based on credit Collectibility that describes the
quality of that credit [9]. based on Article 3 paragraph (1)
Bank Indonesia’s regulations no 8/19/PBI/2006, Earning
Asset Quality in the form of credit is set in 4 categories, that
is Pass, Substandard, Doubtful, and Loss.
D. Data Mining
Data mining is a process that use statistic, math, artificial
intelligence, and machine learning to extract and identify
useful information and knowledge from big database [7].
Data mining is one of step in knowledge discovery database
(KDD) process. Basic stage of KDD can be seen on Fig. 1.
Fig. 1 . KDD Process Model [11]
E. K-Nearest Neighbor
K-Nearest Neighbor (k-NN) is simple data classification
algorithm where shortest distance calculation is used as
measurement to classify a case based on the measurement of
similarity. K-NN algorithm is one of classification algorithm
with lazy learner technique.
The formula used in calculating the distance of d(x,y)
between the old case x and the new case y is as follow :
(1)
F. Dynamic K-Nearest Neighbor and Distance and
Attribute Weighted
Dynamic K-Nearest Neighbor and Distance and
Attribute Weighted (DKNDAW) is an algorithm to
determine the k value dynamically, give attribute weight on
dissimilarity value between attribute, and do distance
weighting to determine class label in k-NN algorithm.
DKNDAW is an algorithm adopted from [7].
In [7] there is improvisation on formula of distance
calculation with adding weight to times with dissimilarity on
every attribute. With that, formula to calculate a distance
between old case x with new case y as follow:
(2)
Notes:
: distance between old case with new case
: i-th attribute value from old case
: i-th attribute value from new case
: dissimilarity value between and
: i-th attribute weight
Dissimilarity has higher value if object are differ.
Dissimilarity measurement for one simple attribute can be
seen on table I that measurement is differ based on data type
for every attribute [12].
The purpose of attribute weighting in Dynamic K-
Nearest Neighbor and Distance and Attribute weighted is to
know which attribute that significant and which one are not.
Weighted method for attribute using ROC (rank order
centroid) weighting method. According to Jeffrey and
Cockfield (2008) on [13], ROC technique give weight for
every attribute corresponding to its ranking that determined
from priority scale.
TABLE I. DISSIMILARITY SINGLE ATTRIBUTE
Attribute type Dissimilarity
Nominal
Ordinal
Interval
Ratio
 2018 2nd International Conference on Informatics and Computational Sciences (ICICoS)

adjusted to the data available and the results of discussions

In general, ROC weighting can be formulated as follow: with the domain expert. For attribute information can be
seen in Table II.

(3) TABLE II. ATTRIBUTE DESCRIPTION

No. Attribute Name Attribute Type Range
Notes: 1 Character Ratio 30-37
: n-th attribute weight value 2 Capacity Ratio 17-20
: Amount of criteria 3 Capital Ratio 3-5
4 Collateral Ratio 0-5
: Ranking 5 Condition of Ratio 71 - 93
Economic
Method used to determine the class label generaly is by 6 Income / month Ratio 1,3 - 5,5
majority voting. But it can become trouble if nearest x installments
neighbor have distance variation, while the nearest neighbor 7 Debt elsewhere Nominal Yes No
8 The number of Ordinal 0 - > 3 people
is more reliable to show the class label. Other thing that dependents
infulence k’s value is wheter it’s even or odd. A more 9 Age Ordinal 18th - 65th
sophicastic approach is with weighting nearest neighbor by 10 Commodity Type Nominal Workshop, Catering,
it’s distance [14]. ...
this following equation is used to identfy the probability Carving Maker, Food
Stalls
of class by giving weight taken from inverse square of 11 Business status Ordinal Micro, Small,
distance : Medium
12 Credit Nominal Pass, Loss
Collectibility
(4)
Where:
C. Data Cleaning
(5)
Data that will not influence the prediction or outside the
predetermined range is removed, in this case the data that
Notes: has an outlier value. Value detection outside of the value
: Class prediction from test data group is done with the help of graphic visualization in the
: Class’s value in contained in class set RapidMiner application. In attribute data that contains data
with outlier values are attributes of character, capacity,
: Amount of nearest neighbor capital, collateral, condition of economic and monthly
: Weight given on i-th distance income.
: Class value in i-th data training
The amount of final data that will be used is 240 data,
: the value is 1 if , and 0 if where there are 148 Good classes and 92 Bad classes.

D. Data Transformation
III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In this stage, the mapping process is carried out on the
A. Understanding Domains and Objectives of KDD attributes that are ordinal and nominal in scale. Mapping
data can be seen in Table III.
The domain in this study is banking, especially crediting
the BPR. The development of understanding of the domain
is done by studying the relevant literature, as well as digging TABLE III. DATA MAPPING TABLE
up information related to crediting by asking questions with No. Attribute Name Attribute Mapping Type
the domain expert, namely the head of the credit Value
department. 1 Debt Status Yes 1 Nominal
No 2
The expected goal of this KDD process is to obtain 2 The number of 0 people 1 Ordinal
information that is used to predict the credit collectability of dependents 1 person 2
new customers based on the specified attributes. 2 persons 3
3 people 4
> 3 people 5
B. Data Selection and Addition
3 Age 15th - 24th 1 Ordinal
The data used in this study came from BPR Bank Jepara 25th - 59th 2
Artha which contains customer data general credit that have > 60th 3
been receive credit from the year of realization of 2012 to 4 Commodity Workshop 1 Nominal
May 2017 recorded in February 2018. The selection of Type Catering 2
... ...
attributes is carried out according to needs and based on Carving 17
relevant research references. The first attribute chosen is the Food stalls 18
attribute that is used for the basis of crediting, namely 5C 5 Business status Micro 1 Ordinal
(Character, Capacity, Capital, Collateral, Condition of Small 2
Economic). Other attributes are determined based on the Middle 3
results of a summary of related research references that are
 2018 2nd International Conference on Informatics and Computational Sciences (ICICoS)

Another process that is done is data normalization. The 5) Identify class label probabilities
values on the attributes that will be applied to Normalization Identify probability class label for the data testing on the
are character attributes, capacity, capital, collateral, k using Equation 4. The equation involves distance
condition of economic and monthly earnings. Data weighting calculations calculated using Equation 5.
normalization is done using Min-max normalization shown
in Equation 6. 6) Determine the class label
Class labels are determined based on the largest number
generated at stage e. If the highest value is generated by a
(6)
class labeled Bad, then it is specified as the class label in the
testing data, for example the opposite for the Good class.
Where, is the original value and represents the
value resulting from the normalization of the value .
is the maximum value and is the minimum IV. RESULT AND ANALYSIS
value of the attribute that will normalized.
A. Performance Measurement
E. Data Mining Performance measurement is done by using the n-fold
In this stage, the predetermined algorithm will be Cross Validation method for the distribution of training data
applied to meet the predetermined goal of predicting credit and test data and using confusion matrix to present
performance results. To determine the performance of the
collectability. Stages in the Dynamic K-Nearest Neighbor
algorithm, precision, recall and accuracy are used.
and Distance algorithm and Weighted Attribute are as
follows: 1) Training Data and Test Data Distribution
Data is divided into 2 parts, namely training data and test
1) Determine the value of k data. This data division uses the 10-fold Cross Validation
K value is the number of closest neighbors that can be method where the data is divided into 10 folds. The total
dynamically determined by the user by using the help of the amount of data is 240 data consisting of 148 pass classes
n-fold Cross Validation and Confusion Matrix approaches and 92 loss classes that are randomly distributed.
during the performance measurement process.
2) Performance Measurement Scenario
2) Determining the attribute weight Performance measurement is divided into several
Determination of attribute weights is carried out based scenarios. The performance measurement algorithm is
on the magnitude of importance for each attribute used. The carried out on each of the different k values, specifically the
level of interest is determined by the domain expert and value of k = 1 to k = 10.
weight calculation is generated by applying Equation (3).
Following is defining the importance and weight of each Scenario 1 is used to see the performance of the
attribute. Attribute weigh data can be seen in Table III. algorithm proposed in this research, namely Dynamic K-
Nearest Neighbor and Distance and Attribute Weighted
3) Calculate distance values each record (DKNDAW).
The next step is to calculate the distance between data
testing and all records in training data by using equation Scenario 2 is used to see the effect of using attribute
(2). Calculation of dissimilarity values between attributes weights on the DKNDAW algorithm. This is done by
based on the type of data in each attribute described in Table removing the attribute weight from the distance calculation
II. While the formula used to calculate the value of formula in the DKNDAW algorithm.
dissimilarity shown in Table IV. which has been Scenario 3 is used to see the effect of each attribute
distinguished by the type of data. weight on the DKNDAW algorithm. This is done by making
4) Looking k nearest neighbors changes to the level of importance that has been determined
Having obtained the value of the distance, it looks for a by the domain expert. The level of attributes importance is
training data k which has the highest value of closeness. K done with Weka application by evaluating attributes using
nearest neighbor search is done by sorting distance values Correlation Attribute Evaluation and Information Gain
from the smallest to largest, then specify the first data to the Attribute Evaluation, then the level of attributes is
data as the data to-k nearest neighbors. determined by the Ranker method. This will be compared to
the results of its performance in the order of importance
level carried out by the domain expert.
TABLE IV. ATTRIBUTE WEIGHT TABLE
No. Attribute Name Importance Weight TABLE V. RESULTS OF PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
1 Character 1 0.2745
2 Capacity 2 0.1836 k Accuracy Precision Recall
3 Capital 3 0.1382 1 61,67 % 50,00 % 46,74 %
4 Collateral 4 0.1079 2 61,67 % 50,00 % 46,74 %
5 Condition of Economic 5 0.0851 3 65,83 % 56,10 % 50,00 %
6 Income / month 6 0.0670 4 65,00 % 55,41 % 44,57 %
7 Debt elsewhere 7 0.0518 5 64,17 % 53,85 % 45,65 %
8 The number of dependents 8 0.0388 6 64,58 % 54,67 % 44,57 %
9 Age 9 0.0275 7 63,75 % 53,33 % 43,48 %
10 Commodity Type 10 0.0174 8 64,58 % 54,67 % 44,57 %
11 Business status 11 0.0083 9 64,58 % 55,07 % 41,30 %
10 64,58 % 54,93 % 42,39 %
 2018 2nd International Conference on Informatics and Computational Sciences (ICICoS)

3) Results of Performance Measurement Scenarios precision and recall values is not too significant. However,
The results of the performance measurement are the the accuracy value at k = 9 and k = 10 is obtained from a
value of accuracy, precision and recall obtained from the significant decrease in recall value. This shows a decrease in
Confusion Matrix. Where the positive class is loss class. the number of loss classes that should be predicted as a loss
Result of performance measurement scenario 1 and scenario class. It can be said that a small k value is not enough to
2 can be seen in table V and table VI. determine the class label properly, a k value that is not too
small and not too large can determine the class label well,
TABLE VI. RESULTS OF PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SCENARIO 2 but as the value of k increases, the class boundaries become
blurred, so the less can determine the class label well. This
K Accuracy Precision Recall
1 57,50 % 44,05 % 40,22 % is because the composition of the class is not balanced, so
2 57,50 % 44,05 % 40,22 % the greater value of k will likely include more majority
3 56,25 % 41,77 % 35,87 % classes that have the effect of error in determining the
4 57,50 % 43,06 % 33,70 % minority class.
5 55,83 % 40,00 % 30,43 %
6 56,67 % 42,11 % 34,78 % Significant differences between the values of accuracy,
7 55,00 % 39,74 % 33,70 % precision and recall are caused by the ability of algorithms
8 57,08 % 42,86 % 35,87 % that cannot predict minority classes (loss) well, so that many
9 56,25 % 41,56 % 34,78 %
10 57,08 % 42,47 % 33,70 %
loss classes are predicted as pass classes. This is because the
class composition training data is not balanced.
The order of attributes importance level using the
Attribute Evaluation Correlation are Capital, Business Based on the comparison of scenario 1 performance
Status, Collateral, Debt, Capacity, Character, Age, results and scenario 2 performance results, it shows that
Condition of Economic, Income, Commodity Type and scenario 1 has higher accuracy, precision and recall values.
Amount of Dependent. Result of performance measurement It can be said that using the attribute weights for Dynamic
scenario 3 can be seen in table VII K-Nearest Neighbor and Distance algorithms and Weighted
Attributes is better than using no attribute weights. A
significant reduction in performance results, shows that the
TABLE VII. RESULTS OF PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SCENARIO 3
CORRELATION ATTRIBUTE EVALUATION use of attribute weights in the proximity between attributes
is very important to determine the class label, especially in
K Accuracy Precision Recall
1 60,42 % 48,35 % 47,83 %
data with an unbalanced class.
2 60,00 % 47,83 % 47,83 % Based on the comparison of performance results from
3 60,00 % 47,73 % 45,65 %
changes in the level of importance of attributes using
4 62,50 % 51,14 % 48,91 %
5 63,33 % 52,08 % 54,35 % Correlation Attribute Evaluation and Information Gain
6 62,92 % 51,69 % 50,00 % Attribute Evaluation shows that the results of sorting using
7 63,75 % 52,75 % 52,17 % the Correlation Attribute Evaluation have a higher value of
8 62,92 % 51,65 % 51,09 % accuracy, precision and recall. So it can be said that the use
9 63,33 % 52,22 % 51,09 % of Attribute Evaluation Correlation in this case is better in
10 63,33 % 52,22 % 51,09 %
determining the order of importance than using Information
The order of importance level of attributes using Gain Attribute Evaluation.
Information Gain Attribute Evaluation are Capital,
Based on the comparison of the results of the level of
Commodity Type, Collateral, Debt, Capacity, Business
importance of the domain expert (Scenario 1) and the level
Status, Income, Condition of Economic, Amount of
of importance of the Attribute Evaluation Correlation, the
Dependent, Age and Character. Result of performance
highest accuracy and precision value is owned by the level
measurement scenario 4 can be seen in table VIII.
of importance of the expert domain, while the highest recall
value is owned by the importance of the Correlation
TABLE VIII. RESULTS OF PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SCENARIO 3 Attribute Evaluation. The difference in the value of
INFORMATION GAIN ATTRIBUTE EVALUATION
accuracy, precision and recall from Scenario 1 and
K Accuracy Precision Recall Correlation Attribute Evaluation is not too significant.
1 56,25 % 44,44 % 39,13 %
2 56,25 % 42,86 % 42,39 % In the results of the Correlation Attribute Evaluation
3 57,92 % 44,44 % 39,13 % there is a difference in the value of k that produces the
4 58,33 % 45,24 % 41,30 % highest value. The difference between the accuracy and
5 57,92 % 44,58 % 40,22 % precision values at k = 5 and k = 7 is not very significant.
6 57,50 % 44,05 % 40,22 %
But the difference in recall values at k = 5 and k = 7 is quite
7 58,33 % 45,00 % 39,13 %
8 57,50 % 43,42 % 35,87 % significant, therefore it can be said that the value of k = 5 is
9 57,92 % 44,00 % 35,87 % also quite good in predicting class labels. The increased
10 57,50 % 43,75 % 38,04 % recall value indicates that the number of successful loss
class is predicted to be more loss class than the pass class of
4) Analysis of Performance Measurement Scenario Results the actual number of loss classes.
In Table 4.1. it can be seen that the value of accuracy,
Almost the same as in Scenario 1, high accuracy,
precision and recall increases significantly from k = 2 to k =
precision and recall values in the Correlation Attribute
3, then from k = 3 to k = 10 the difference in accuracy,
Evaluation are generated by k values that are not too small
 2018 2nd International Conference on Informatics and Computational Sciences (ICICoS)
and not too large. Significant differences between the values
of accuracy, precision and recall are caused by the ability of
algorithms that cannot predict minority classes (loss) well,
so that many loss classes are predicted as pass classes. This
is because the class composition training data is not
balanced.
B. Knowledge Discovery
The knowledge gained from the previous process is the
results of good performance are shown by the same high
accuracy, precision and recall values, but in an unbalanced
class, in addition to the accuracy of things that must be
considered is precision and recall to see the bias in one
class. High values of accuracy, precision and recall tend to
be produced by k values are not too small and not too large.
This knowledge is followed up as a consideration in
determining the best k value from the Dynamic K-Nearest
Neighbor and Distance algorithm and Weighted Attribute.
Based on the order of importance by the expert domain, the
value of k = 3 can be applied to the application as the best k
value.
V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
This research has produced an application for predicting
prospective debtor credit Collectibility that can be used by
Bank BPR Jepara Artha to make decisions easier for
prospective recipients of credit. Dynamic 3-Nearest
Neighbor Algorithms and Distance and Weighted Attributes
applied to applications using 240 general customer data and
the level of attributes importance determined by the expert
domain can be used to predict credit Collectibility with
accuracy values of 65.83%, precision 56.10 % and 50%
recall.
Suggestions that can be used for development in further
research are the addition of import features to facilitate the
process of adding training data with larger data.
REFERENCES
[1] Henley, WE., Hand, DJ, 1996, "A k-Nearest Neighbor
Classifier for Assessing Consuer Credit Risk," Journal of The
Royal Statistical Society. Series D (The Sattistician), Volume
45, No. 1, pp. 77-95.
[2] Abdelmoula, AK., 2015, "Bank Credit Risk Analysis with k-
Nearest-Neighbor Classfier: Case of Tunisian Banks,"
Accounting and Management Information Systems, Volume
XIV, No. 1, pp. 79-106.
[3] Mukid, MA., Widiharih, T., Rusgiyono, A., Prahutama, A,
2018, "Credit Scoring Analysis Using Weighted k Nearest
Neighbor," Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1025.
[4] Wang, X., Xu M., Pusatli Ö.T., 2015, "A Survey of
Applying Machine Learning Techniques for Credit Rating:
Existing Models and Open Issues," In: Arik S., Huang T., Lai
W., Liu Q. (eds) Neural Information Processing. ICONIP
2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 9490.
Springer, Cham.
[5] Nugroho, A., Kusrini & Arief, M. R., 2015, "Sistem
Pendukung Keputusan Kredit Usaha Rakyat PT. Bank
Rakyat Indonesia Unit Kaliangkrik Magelang," Citec
Journal, Volume II, pp. 1-15.
[6] Leidiyana, H., 2013, "Penerapan Algoritma K-Nearest
Neighbor untuk Penentuan Resiko Kredit Kepemilikan
Kendaraan Bermotor," Jurnal Penelitian Ilmu Komputer,
System Embedded & Logic, Volume I, pp. 65-76.
[7] Wu, J., Cai, Z.-h. & Shuang, A., 2012, "Hybrid Dynamic K-
Nearest-Neighbour and Distance and Attribute Weighted
Method for Classification," International Journal of
Computer Applications in Technology, pp. 378-384.
[8] Kasmir, 2002. Dasar-dasar Perbankan. Jakarta: Rajawali
Pers.
[9] Hermansyah, 2006. Hukum Perbankan Nasional Indonesia.
Jakarta: Kencana.
[7] Turban, E., Sharda, R. & Delen, D., 2011, "Decision Support
System and Business Intelligence System 9th ed.," New
Jersey: Prentice Hall.
[11] Shafique, U. & Qaiser, H., 2014, "A Comparative Study of
Data Mining Process Models (KDD, CRISP-DM and
SEMMA)," International Journal of Innovation and Scientific
Research, Volume XII, pp. 217-222.
[12] Hermawati, F. A., 2013. Data Mining. Yogyakarta: CV.
ANDI OFFSET
[13] Rahma, A., 2013, "Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Seleksi
Masuk Mahasiswa Menggunakan Metode Smarter,"
Bandung: Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.
[14] Prasetyo, E., 2014. Data Mining: Mengolah Data Menjadi
Informasi Menggunakan MATLAB. Yogyakarta: CV. ANDI
OFFSET.