Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] What does the United States, Chad in sub-Saharan Africa, and parts of the war-torn Middle East have in common? They don't accept EMV-chip payment cards at point-of-sale terminals. Around the world, more than 1.2 billion cards and 15.4 million terminals are EMV-compliant. And the 1 billion cards in the U.S.? Magstripe only. is the big black hole, says Toni Merschen, formerly responsible for developing and deploying global EMV programs at MasterCard and now principal of a consulting firm in Simmerath, Germany. U.S. cards are no longer an international method of payment, he adds. EMV, which stands for Europay, MasterCard, and Visa, is an open standard for interoperability of global payments maintained by EMVco, a consortium of American Express, JCB International, MasterCard and Visa. EMV is not new. Its specifications for embedded microchips were introduced in the late 1990s and have been stable since 2002, says Merschen. Europe has been a long-time proponent of EMV (some countries there subsidized its development) and the chip technology is making serious inroads into Asia. Canada is aggressively rolling out EMV chip cards to its citizens as well. Indeed, the is the only G-20 country to continue to support magstripe payment technology. Slow out of the gate To date, only a handful of banks and credit unions are adding EMV chips to traditional magstripe payments cards. They include Wells Fargo, JP Morgan Chase, Citibank, Bank, United Nations Federal Credit Union, and SiliconValley Bank. The reason these cards never established a base here was because there wasn't a business case for it, observes ABA's Nessa Feddis, vice-president and senior counsel for regulatory compliance. Part of that, she says, was resistance from retailers who did not want to pay to upgrade or replace card readers. Even today, only 25% of merchants choose to accept PIN transactions, according to the Federal Reserve. By contrast, says Feddis, in countries like France, which had unreliable landline telephone systems (and thus greater risk of fraud), the government subsidized adoption of chip and PIN cards. (Just like magstripe cards, EMV-standard cards can be issued with or without PINs see sidebar, p. 28.) Another view, from Randy Vanderhoof, executive director of the Smart Card Alliance, is that every part of the payments system has to be touched in order to fully process EMV-compliant transactions. With so many players, it's difficult to get the disparate parts of the payments ecosystem aligned and working together. These varied stakeholders, including issuers, acquirers, merchants, payment processors, consumers, and regulators all have differing business cases, adds Alistair Newton, vice-president, Banking and Investment Services at Gartner, Inc. He believes that is part of the reason more financial institutions have not issued these cards to date. Sorry, you're ... declined The difference in card standards is having an impact overseas. cardholders are feeling the pain as their formerly trustworthy magstripe cards are increasingly declined due to incompatible card technology, particularly at unattended kiosks found at train stations, tollbooths, and gasoline pumps. Things may get worse for travelers abroad. There have been rumblings that the European Central Bank and U.K. Payments Council are considering eliminating magstripe as an acceptable form of payment. According to an Aite Group study titled, Broken Promise of Pay Anytime, Anywhere, nearly half of travelers have experienced a problem using a issued payment card internationally. Three quarters of those cardholders reported feeling extremely frustrated and more than half (56%) said they were embarrassed. Not all travelers have had problems, but those who do tend to be vocal. Take a quick look through the postings on the blog Flyertalk. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle