MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2994138437

The Role of Unused Loan Commitments and Transaction Deposits During the Recent Financial Crisis

2014· article· en· W2994138437 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mihaela Craioveanu, Jose Mercado-Mendez

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBanking stability, regulation, efficiency
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoanFinancial systemFinancial crisisBusinessMarket liquidityDatabase transactionCapital (architecture)Quarter (Canadian coin)Capital requirementFinanceEconomicsIncentive
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our study looks at the financial condition of banks during the recent financial crisis. We focus on the association between bank capital ratios and unused loan commitments and transaction deposits for depository institutions. We test empirically whether loan commitments had a different impact on the capital ratios of those banks that failed and did not fail during the recent financial crisis. We also analyze the role of transaction deposits, a liquidity measure, on the financial condition of depository institutions. We use a large data set for U.S. commercial banks between the first quarter of 2001 and the last quarter of 2010. Our results suggest that unused loan commitments and transaction deposits had a significant effect on the capital ratios of non-failed banks prior to the financial crisis, but only transaction deposits affected the bank capital ratios of non-failed banks during the crisis. For failed banks, large levels of unused loan commitments seem to be associated with capital ratios only during the financial crisis.

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)0.016
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.186 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicBanking stability, regulation, efficiency→French-language works237,207→