MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2738328337

New Zealand banking in 2016

2012· article· en· W2738328337 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Tripe

Bibliographic record

VenueInFinance: The Magazine for Finsia Members · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicNew Zealand Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Profitability indexBusinessFinancial crisisFinancial systemEconomicsFinanceGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the recent financial crisis started to impact New Zealand banking in 2008, profits earned by banks have generally been well below the 1% benchmark commonly regarded as acceptable. The long-term trend is shown in the graph below (the severe decline in profitability in the September quarter of 2009 was due to the banks making provision for tax in relation to court cases, with some reversal of previous excess provisions in the following, December 2009 quarter). These figures are for the four major banks plus TSB and Kiwibank (since March 2006 only).

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0620.020

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInFinance: The Magazine for Finsia MembersSame topicNew Zealand Economic and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207