MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2309255730 · doi:10.1057/9780230281189_6

Big Bang Banking

2010· book-chapter· en· W2309255730 on OpenAlex
Jacqueline Botterill

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

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Regulation and Crises
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBureaucracyBusinessPoliticsMarket economyPolitical economyFinancial systemLaw and economicsEconomicsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this chapter, I trace how changing global economic circumstances, cultural sentiments, and the political climate of the late 1970s altered banking culture and practice. A different type of relationship between the banks and the personal financial market emerged. By the end of the 1970s, 76% of Britons had bank accounts. Targeting the unbanked no longer made sense after the banks’ rapid expansion as marketers pointed out: ‘The unbanked as a vast army of untapped banking business has become a myth that banks would do well to forget’ (Smart, 1984, p. 13.). Another marketer pointed out, ‘What many banks are now beginning to understand is that the notion of a homogeneous mass market is quaint and dangerous’ (Mooney, 1995, p. 58). Further, the banks’ extensive networks proved a liability for a new generation of consumers who grew weary of the mass model. The idea of mass-banking too easily appeared to suppress uniqueness: the friendly-smile management could appear as simply a cover for an alienating bureaucracy.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.179 · 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