Systems and methods for performing scoring optimization

A system that generates a unified determination based on subdeterminations, the system including:

• a memory;
• a processor;
• a first score processor generating a first subdetermination based on first criteria, wherein the first subdetermination is a front end risk score;
• a second score processor generating a second subdetermination based on second criteria, wherein the second subdetermination is a back end risk score;
• wherein the front end risk score determines if an individual is to be mailed an offer for a financial product;
• and
• the back end risk score determines if the individual, who is a respondent to the offer, is to be extended the financial product;
• a combination score processor generating a unified determination based on the first subdetermination and the second subdetermination, the combination score processor including:
• an iteration control portion assigning, using iterative processing, an assigned weighting that is factored into a relationship in conjunction with the first subdetermination and second subdetermination;
• a feasibility determination portion determining if the assigned weighting, as factored into the relationship, satisfies at least one constraint imposed on the relationship;
• a comparison portion comparing the assigned weighting, as factored into a further relationship, to an optimized weighting, as factored into the further relationship, which was previously determined, to determine if the assigned weighting is improved over the optimized weighting;
• and
• if the assigned weighting is improved, then assigning the assigned weighting to be the optimized weighting, whereby the further relationship is further maximized and an improved optimized weighting is identified for use in the unified determination to determine risk associated with an individual.

A computer readable medium, embodying program instructions executable by a machine to perform method steps, that generate a unified determination based on subdeterminations, said method steps comprising:

• generating, by a first portion, a first subdetermination based on first criteria, wherein the first subdetermination is a front end risk score;
• generating, by a second portion, a second subdetermination based on second criteria, wherein the second subdetermination is a back end risk score;
• wherein the front end risk score determines if an individual is to be mailed an offer for a financial product;
• and
• the back end risk score determines if the individual, who is a respondent to the offer, is to be extended the financial product;
• generating, by a third portion, a unified determination, based on the first subdetermination and the second subdetermination, including:
• assigning, by an iteration control portion, using iterative processing, an assigned weighting factored into a relationship in conjunction with the first subdetermination and second subdetermination;
• determining, by a feasibility determination portion, if the assigned weighting, as factored into the relationship, satisfies at least one constraint imposed on the relationship;
• comparing, by a comparison portion, the assigned weighting, as factored into a further relationship, to an optimized weighting, as factored into the further relationship, which was previously determined, to determine if the assigned weighting is improved over the optimized weighting;
• and
• if the assigned weighting is improved, then the comparison portion assigning the assigned weighting to be the optimized weighting, whereby the further relationship is further maximized and an improved optimized weighting is identified for use in the unified determination to determine risk associated with an individual.