MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1488439078 · doi:10.34989/sdp-2009-13

Network Analysis and Canada's Large Value Transfer System

2021· preprint· en· W1488439078 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lana Embree, Tom Roberts

Bibliographic record

VenueEconstor (Econstor) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBanking stability, regulation, efficiency
Canadian institutionsBank of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClearingInterdependenceSettlement (finance)PaymentNetwork analysisBusinessTransfer paymentValue (mathematics)Network structurePayment systemInterdependent networksIndustrial organizationComputer scienceEconomicsFinanceEngineeringPolitical scienceMarket economyDistributed computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analysis of the characteristics and structure of a network of financial institutions can provide insight into the complex relationships and interdependencies that exist in a payment, clearing, and settlement system (PCSS), and allow an intuitive understanding of the PCSS's efficiency, stability, and resiliency. The authors review the literature related to the PCSS network and describe the daily and intraday network structure of payment activity in the Large Value Transfer System (LVTS), which is an integral component of Canada's financial system. The picture that emerges confirms that the LVTS is highly centralized among a few key participants, similar to other PCSSs, based on the network of relationships. This could heighten the systemic importance of these participants, and the susceptibility of the system to financial contagion. There have been small variations in the relative importance of individual banks, but the network-wide pattern of relationships has remained stable from 2004 to 2008, even through the credit crisis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.185 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconstor (Econstor)Same topicBanking stability, regulation, efficiencyFrench-language works237,207