The Risks of Derivatives Contracts and Their Reflections on the Global Financial Crisis Analytical Study in (Toronto – Dominion) Bank
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The research tacklets the role of risks arising from the excessive use of derivative contracts for trading in financial crises, including the recent global financial crisis in (2008) which is known the mortgage crisis. In order to prove the hypothesis of the research, the risk index of derivative contracts has been chosed as expressed in the measure of (value at risk) to be the main field for testing the hypothesis of research. The duration of the contract has been also chased for (15) years between the years (2001- 2015), the period preceding the global financial crisis, while the second represents the period of time that followed. The research reached a number of conclusions, but the most important one was that there was a significant difference between the risk of derivative contracts in the two periods preceding the global financial crisis and those that followed. The research recommended that the management of the (Toronto - Dominion)bank should measure its revenues from its transactions in derivatives contracts periodically and in detail with a view to reducing and managing risk and achieving the desired objectives of investing in these contracts
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".