Bank groups and financial conglomerates, retooling resolution regimes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article discusses developments in reforms to the regulation of bank and financial institution resolution regimes in the European Union, the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States. Resolution regimes are the triage for financial institutions after they experience problems. They work in tandem with measures that require appropriate levels of capitalisation, and are not a substitute for current weaknesses of the system in this respect. While these developments are extraordinary in their breadth, drastic measures were required because of the significance of the losses arising out of the financial crisis. Largely the financial institutions themselves are driving the structures being developed, and while these structures will assist with early financial institution resolution, they will not change fundamental values that underpinned the system that lead to the financial crisis. One normative question that remains to be answered is why, when addressing the collapse of banks, the emphasis has been on the creation of a financial safety net for major banks, with less concern for broader social safety nets for individuals and small businesses harmed by the governance failure of banks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it