• Journal of the Korean Regional Science Association
• /
• v.34 no.4
• /
• pp.3-18
• /
• 2018

These days, regional innovation draws more attention than ever as a growth engine for regional economies, and governments put a variety of efforts to establish Regional Innovation systems(RISs). In this circumstance, this study aims to analyze types of RISs and the combinations of the factors influencing innovation performance as measured by patent application. Most of previous works have depended on case-oriented or variable-oriented strategy to classify types of RISs or to analyze the effects on performance of innovation factors, having some limitations: Variable-oriented approaches fail to capture complex combinatory effects of factors, while case-oriented approaches tend to depend on subjective interpretation. This study made use of the recently proposed fs/QCA(Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis) to overcome the limitations of those strategies. Based on the theory of RIS, three factors for regional innovation-input, infrastructure, and network-are used to classify 16 Korean Provinces. The results show that eight types of regional innovation types are identified, and that most of the regions are classified into either IN-type, equipped with high levels of Input and Network, or F-type, with high levels of infrastructure. In addition, applying seven sub-variables of the three factors to the fussy-set combination factor analysis, we examine a combination of factors influencing patent application. The results show that regions with high levels of R&D expense, valid patent, industry-academia cooperation, IP budget, and TLO values, and low IP capital almost always have a high level of patent application. Therefore, for regional innovation, the public sector needs to provide institutional support for R & D personnel training. It is also important to for both the public and the private sectors to make efforts to stimulate IP financing.

• Information Systems Review
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.127-154
• /
• 2017

This study aims to identify various service innovation patterns in the service industry and understand the main differences among them. We attempt to create a new typology of service innovation by analyzing its patterns based on the four major dimensions of service innovation (i.e., service concept, service delivery, customer interaction, and technology). We then investigate whether firms pursuing different service innovation patterns significantly differ from one another in terms of their performance (high and low performance). Based on empirical data collected from 198 Korean firms in the knowledge-intensive business service sector, four major clusters composed of different service innovation dimensions are identified. These four clusters can be interpreted as specific service innovation patterns, including "technology based high customer interaction," "high technology based high service delivery," "service delivery and high customer interaction-integrated," and "strongly balanced" innovators. High firm performance does not depend on the individual service innovation dimension but on the specific configurations of such service dimensions. Customer interaction also has an important role in achieving innovation success and improving firm performance, while technology has a key role in enhancing firm performance. This study sheds new light on service innovation research by developing a new typology of service innovation, identifying four major clusters as service innovation patterns, and exploring the relationship between service innovation patterns and firm performance.

• Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.139-153
• /
• 2017

Corporate bankruptcy can cause great losses not only to stakeholders but also to many related sectors in society. Through the economic crises, bankruptcy have increased and bankruptcy prediction models have become more and more important. Therefore, corporate bankruptcy has been regarded as one of the major topics of research in business management. Also, many studies in the industry are in progress and important. Previous studies attempted to utilize various methodologies to improve the bankruptcy prediction accuracy and to resolve the overfitting problem, such as Multivariate Discriminant Analysis (MDA), Generalized Linear Model (GLM). These methods are based on statistics. Recently, researchers have used machine learning methodologies such as Support Vector Machine (SVM), Artificial Neural Network (ANN). Furthermore, fuzzy theory and genetic algorithms were used. Because of this change, many of bankruptcy models are developed. Also, performance has been improved. In general, the company's financial and accounting information will change over time. Likewise, the market situation also changes, so there are many difficulties in predicting bankruptcy only with information at a certain point in time. However, even though traditional research has problems that don't take into account the time effect, dynamic model has not been studied much. When we ignore the time effect, we get the biased results. So the static model may not be suitable for predicting bankruptcy. Thus, using the dynamic model, there is a possibility that bankruptcy prediction model is improved. In this paper, we propose RNN (Recurrent Neural Network) which is one of the deep learning methodologies. The RNN learns time series data and the performance is known to be good. Prior to experiment, we selected non-financial firms listed on the KOSPI, KOSDAQ and KONEX markets from 2010 to 2016 for the estimation of the bankruptcy prediction model and the comparison of forecasting performance. In order to prevent a mistake of predicting bankruptcy by using the financial information already reflected in the deterioration of the financial condition of the company, the financial information was collected with a lag of two years, and the default period was defined from January to December of the year. Then we defined the bankruptcy. The bankruptcy we defined is the abolition of the listing due to sluggish earnings. We confirmed abolition of the list at KIND that is corporate stock information website. Then we selected variables at previous papers. The first set of variables are Z-score variables. These variables have become traditional variables in predicting bankruptcy. The second set of variables are dynamic variable set. Finally we selected 240 normal companies and 226 bankrupt companies at the first variable set. Likewise, we selected 229 normal companies and 226 bankrupt companies at the second variable set. We created a model that reflects dynamic changes in time-series financial data and by comparing the suggested model with the analysis of existing bankruptcy predictive models, we found that the suggested model could help to improve the accuracy of bankruptcy predictions. We used financial data in KIS Value (Financial database) and selected Multivariate Discriminant Analysis (MDA), Generalized Linear Model called logistic regression (GLM), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Artificial Neural Network (ANN) model as benchmark. The result of the experiment proved that RNN's performance was better than comparative model. The accuracy of RNN was high in both sets of variables and the Area Under the Curve (AUC) value was also high. Also when we saw the hit-ratio table, the ratio of RNNs that predicted a poor company to be bankrupt was higher than that of other comparative models. However the limitation of this paper is that an overfitting problem occurs during RNN learning. But we expect to be able to solve the overfitting problem by selecting more learning data and appropriate variables. From these result, it is expected that this research will contribute to the development of a bankruptcy prediction by proposing a new dynamic model.

• Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems
• /
• v.17 no.3
• /
• pp.187-201
• /
• 2011

KOSPI200 index is the Korean stock price index consisting of actively traded 200 stocks in the Korean stock market. Its base value of 100 was set on January 3, 1990. The Korea Exchange (KRX) developed derivatives markets on the KOSPI200 index. KOSPI200 index futures market, introduced in 1996, has become one of the most actively traded indexes markets in the world. Traders can make profit by entering a long position on the KOSPI200 index futures contract if the KOSPI200 index will rise in the future. Likewise, they can make profit by entering a short position if the KOSPI200 index will decline in the future. Basically, KOSPI200 index futures trading is a short-term zero-sum game and therefore most futures traders are using technical indicators. Advanced traders make stable profits by using system trading technique, also known as algorithm trading. Algorithm trading uses computer programs for receiving real-time stock market data, analyzing stock price movements with various technical indicators and automatically entering trading orders such as timing, price or quantity of the order without any human intervention. Recent studies have shown the usefulness of artificial intelligent systems in forecasting stock prices or investment risk. KOSPI200 index data is numerical time-series data which is a sequence of data points measured at successive uniform time intervals such as minute, day, week or month. KOSPI200 index futures traders use technical analysis to find out some patterns on the time-series chart. Although there are many technical indicators, their results indicate the market states among bull, bear and flat. Most strategies based on technical analysis are divided into trend following strategy and non-trend following strategy. Both strategies decide the market states based on the patterns of the KOSPI200 index time-series data. This goes well with Markov model (MM). Everybody knows that the next price is upper or lower than the last price or similar to the last price, and knows that the next price is influenced by the last price. However, nobody knows the exact status of the next price whether it goes up or down or flat. So, hidden Markov model (HMM) is better fitted than MM. HMM is divided into discrete HMM (DHMM) and continuous HMM (CHMM). The only difference between DHMM and CHMM is in their representation of state probabilities. DHMM uses discrete probability density function and CHMM uses continuous probability density function such as Gaussian Mixture Model. KOSPI200 index values are real number and these follow a continuous probability density function, so CHMM is proper than DHMM for the KOSPI200 index. In this paper, we present an artificial intelligent trading system based on CHMM for the KOSPI200 index futures system traders. Traders have experienced on technical trading for the KOSPI200 index futures market ever since the introduction of the KOSPI200 index futures market. They have applied many strategies to make profit in trading the KOSPI200 index futures. Some strategies are based on technical indicators such as moving averages or stochastics, and others are based on candlestick patterns such as three outside up, three outside down, harami or doji star. We show a trading system of moving average cross strategy based on CHMM, and we compare it to a traditional algorithmic trading system. We set the parameter values of moving averages at common values used by market practitioners. Empirical results are presented to compare the simulation performance with the traditional algorithmic trading system using long-term daily KOSPI200 index data of more than 20 years. Our suggested trading system shows higher trading performance than naive system trading.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Intelligent Systems Conference
• /
• 1993.06a
• /
• pp.1051-1054
• /
• 1993

The International Atomic Energy Agency's Statute in Article III.A.5 allows it“to establish and administer safeguards designed to ensure that special fissionable and other materials, services, equipment, facilities and information made available by the Agency or at its request or under its supervision or control are not used in such a way as to further any military purpose; and to apply safeguards, at the request of the parties, to any bilateral or multilateral arrangement, or at the request of a State, to any of that State's activities in the field of atomic energy”. Safeguards are essentially a technical means of verifying the fulfilment of political obligations undertaken by States and given a legal force in international agreements relating to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. The main political objectives are: to assure the international community that States are complying with their non-proliferation and other peaceful undertakings; and to deter (a) the diversion of afeguarded nuclear materials to the production of nuclear explosives or for military purposes and (b) the misuse of safeguarded facilities with the aim of producing unsafeguarded nuclear material. It is clear that no international safeguards system can physically prevent diversion. The IAEA safeguards system is basically a verification measure designed to provide assurance in those cases in which diversion has not occurred. Verification is accomplished by two basic means: material accountancy and containment and surveillance measures. Nuclear material accountancy is the fundamental IAEA safeguards mechanism, while containment and surveillance serve as important complementary measures. Material accountancy refers to a collection of measurements and other determinations which enable the State and the Agency to maintain a current picture of the location and movement of nuclear material into and out of material balance areas, i. e. areas where all material entering or leaving is measurab e. A containment measure is one that is designed by taking advantage of structural characteristics, such as containers, tanks or pipes, etc. To establish the physical integrity of an area or item by preventing the undetected movement of nuclear material or equipment. Such measures involve the application of tamper-indicating or surveillance devices. Surveillance refers to both human and instrumental observation aimed at indicating the movement of nuclear material. The verification process consists of three over-lapping elements: (a) Provision by the State of information such as - design information describing nuclear installations; - accounting reports listing nuclear material inventories, receipts and shipments; - documents amplifying and clarifying reports, as applicable; - notification of international transfers of nuclear material. (b) Collection by the IAEA of information through inspection activities such as - verification of design information - examination of records and repo ts - measurement of nuclear material - examination of containment and surveillance measures - follow-up activities in case of unusual findings. (c) Evaluation of the information provided by the State and of that collected by inspectors to determine the completeness, accuracy and validity of the information provided by the State and to resolve any anomalies and discrepancies. To design an effective verification system, one must identify possible ways and means by which nuclear material could be diverted from peaceful uses, including means to conceal such diversions. These theoretical ways and means, which have become known as diversion strategies, are used as one of the basic inputs for the development of safeguards procedures, equipment and instrumentation. For analysis of implementation strategy purposes, it is assumed that non-compliance cannot be excluded a priori and that consequently there is a low but non-zero probability that a diversion could be attempted in all safeguards ituations. An important element of diversion strategies is the identification of various possible diversion paths; the amount, type and location of nuclear material involved, the physical route and conversion of the material that may take place, rate of removal and concealment methods, as appropriate. With regard to the physical route and conversion of nuclear material the following main categories may be considered: - unreported removal of nuclear material from an installation or during transit - unreported introduction of nuclear material into an installation - unreported transfer of nuclear material from one material balance area to another - unreported production of nuclear material, e. g. enrichment of uranium or production of plutonium - undeclared uses of the material within the installation. With respect to the amount of nuclear material that might be diverted in a given time (the diversion rate), the continuum between the following two limiting cases is cons dered: - one significant quantity or more in a short time, often known as abrupt diversion; and - one significant quantity or more per year, for example, by accumulation of smaller amounts each time to add up to a significant quantity over a period of one year, often called protracted diversion. Concealment methods may include: - restriction of access of inspectors - falsification of records, reports and other material balance areas - replacement of nuclear material, e. g. use of dummy objects - falsification of measurements or of their evaluation - interference with IAEA installed equipment.As a result of diversion and its concealment or other actions, anomalies will occur. All reasonable diversion routes, scenarios/strategies and concealment methods have to be taken into account in designing safeguards implementation strategies so as to provide sufficient opportunities for the IAEA to observe such anomalies. The safeguards approach for each facility will make a different use of these procedures, equipment and instrumentation according to the various diversion strategies which could be applicable to that facility and according to the detection and inspection goals which are applied. Postulated pathways sets of scenarios comprise those elements of diversion strategies which might be carried out at a facility or across a State's fuel cycle with declared or undeclared activities. All such factors, however, contain a degree of fuzziness that need a human judgment to make the ultimate conclusion that all material is being used for peaceful purposes. Safeguards has been traditionally based on verification of declared material and facilities using material accountancy as a fundamental measure. The strength of material accountancy is based on the fact that it allows to detect any diversion independent of the diversion route taken. Material accountancy detects a diversion after it actually happened and thus is powerless to physically prevent it and can only deter by the risk of early detection any contemplation by State authorities to carry out a diversion. Recently the IAEA has been faced with new challenges. To deal with these, various measures are being reconsidered to strengthen the safeguards system such as enhanced assessment of the completeness of the State's initial declaration of nuclear material and installations under its jurisdiction enhanced monitoring and analysis of open information and analysis of open information that may indicate inconsistencies with the State's safeguards obligations. Precise information vital for such enhanced assessments and analyses is normally not available or, if available, difficult and expensive collection of information would be necessary. Above all, realistic appraisal of truth needs sound human judgment.