MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2508083695 · doi:10.1177/0891242416665908

Dynamics of the Location of Financial Institutions

2016· article· en· W2508083695 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEconomic Development Quarterly · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Mennonite UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrodata (statistics)MainstreamCensusPovertyUnemploymentProsperityEconomicsFinancePanel dataEconomic growthBusinessPolitical scienceSociologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cities are a significant source of economic growth and prosperity, but they may also contribute to social and economic problems, including unemployment, poverty, and inaccessible financial institutions. The authors have gathered a unique panel data set for Toronto that locates financial institutions by census tract and links this information to census public use microdata from 1981 to 2006 to show that mainstream financial institutions have migrated to the suburbs and that, simultaneously, so-called fringe financial institutions, especially payday lenders, have expanded their operations in the inner city. The authors then use panel regression models and, among other results, find that census tracts with low income are less attractive to mainstream institutions over time and more attractive to fringe institutions, which provide more limited and expensive services. The results imply that the dynamics of the location of financial institutions may present an additional barrier to upward economic mobility for inner-city residents.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.180 · 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