MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Conundrum of Financial Regulation: Origins, Controversies, and Prospects

2011· article· en· W2164971442 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Law and Social Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicRegulation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSanctionsFinancial regulationState (computer science)EconomicsFinancial marketCapitalismNormativeFinancial servicesFinanceLaw and economicsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review surveys the origins and development of financial regulation as a concept and as a set of legal (state) and extralegal policies aimed at controlling financial sector activity, specifically stock market exchange. It outlines the basic tools that made financial capitalism possible, the establishment of state regulatory agencies, the cyclical nature of disaster and reform, and struggles over the viability, purposes, and sanctions regulators should pursue. I argue that recent developments, notably globalized trade and the neoliberal policies that states have pursued since the 1980s, have weakened the ability of regulators to take meaningful actions to control the antisocial acts of a financial sector that has grown, literally, too big to fail. Recent evidence indicates that the rate of technological innovations in the financial sector has outpaced the normative capacity of legal and regulatory structures. The review concludes with an examination of the solutions and remedies posed by a range of different scholars across various theoretical positions.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.238 · 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