MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964252055 · doi:10.1515/ceej-2018-0014

Cyclical Fluctuations in the Banking Services Market and the Changes in the Situation of Entities from the Financial Services Sector

2018· article· en· W2964252055 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert Skikiewicz, Józef Garczarczyk

Bibliographic record

VenueCentral European Economic Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Financial servicesFinancial sectorBusinessEconomic sectorFinancial marketFinancial systemEconomicsFinanceEconomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Section K of the services sector includes entities conducting financial and insurance activities and, among others, banks. Fluctuations in the whole economy and its individual sectors’ situation are interrelated; hence, one may also expect similarities of cyclical fluctuations in the banking sector and in the entire financial sector. The analyses in the article concern the connections between the cyclical fluctuations on the banking services market and in the entire K section of the services sector, grouping entities conducting financial and insurance activities in Poland. The analyses proved that changes in the economic situation appear earlier in the banking sector than in section K of the services sector. The time range of analyses covered the period from the first quarter of 2003 to the first quarter of 2018. Conclusions on relationships were formulated on the basis of cross-correlation analysis and the analysis of the turning points in the time series of variables describing the cyclical fluctuations in the banking market and in the K section of the services sector.

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)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCentral European Economic JournalSame topicComplex Systems and Time Series AnalysisFrench-language works237,207