MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2673808709 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v9n7p154

Interest Rate and Financing of Islamic Banks in Indonesia (A Vector Auto Regression Approach)

2017· article· en· W2673808709 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bismi Khalidin, Raja Masbar

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterest rateIslamIslamic financeGranger causalityIslamic bankingInvestment functionInvestment (military)EconomicsBusinessFinanceProfit (economics)Financial systemEconometricsMacroeconomicsProduction (economics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Not only do commercial banks but also Islamic banks take part towards the economic growth and stability in Indonesia. Islamic banks through the financing services provide sources of fund for investment activities. However, Islamic banks do not employ variable of interest rate in financing activities because it is prohibited in Islam. The banks utilize a profit sharing rate (PSR) system instead. Moreover, the banks must avoid themselves from the influence of interest rate directly or indirectly. This paper aims at exploring the existence of interest rate towards the financing of the Indonesian Islamic banks. By using the VAR method and monthly-based time series data from 2009-2015, interest rate represented by commercial banking rates for consumption (CBRc) and for working capital (CBRwc), the research result indicates that the Islamic banks’ financing in Indonesia is indirectly influenced by interest rate. Both the Granger causality and the Pearson correlation tests show that the financing correlate significantly with the rate. The correlation between them is also proved by Impulse Response Function (IRF).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207