MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2524922919 · doi:10.4236/ajibm.2016.69095

An Empirical Study about the Effect Which “Bao Bao” Internet Monetary Funds Make on Deposits in Chinese Commercial Banks

2016· article· en· W2524922919 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jinjin Gong, Xiaofen Ye, Zhilong Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Industrial and Business Management · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSouth China Agricultural UniversityChina Agricultural University
KeywordsThe InternetChinaBusinessSample (material)Quarter (Canadian coin)Monetary economicsPaymentEconomicsFinanceFinancial system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper chooses 14 listed banks in China June 2013 to March 2016 quarter data as sample, exploding the effect of “Bao bao” Internet monetary funds on deposits in commercial banks based on the econometric model. The empirical results show that “Bao bao” Internet monetary funds have not been diverted the deposits balance of commercial banks, but it increases the cost of deposits of commercial banks, and brings a certain amount of pressure on interest payments of Chinese commercial 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.479
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Industrial and Business ManagementSame topicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital FinanceFrench-language works237,207