IMPROVEMENT OF FINANCIAL SUPERVISION ON THE BASIS OF INTERNATIONAL PRINCIPLES IMPLEMENTATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is devoted to the problem of financial supervision system compliance in the countries with the international principles and the best world practices. The main international principles of effective banking supervision, insurance and regulation of the securities market are analyzed. We developed a scientific and methodological approach to assessing the country's financial supervision compliance with international principles, which allows to determine the dynamics of development and improvement of financial supervision in banking, insurance and securities segments of the financial sector. A scale for translating financial supervisory compliance assessments into international principles was developed and statistical tools of arithmetic weighted and geometric mean were used to summarize the implementation of Core Principles for Effective Banking Supervision, Insurance Core Principles and Objectives and Principles of Securities Regulation. The average level the implementation of each of the principles of Effective Banking Supervision, Insurance Core Principles and Objectives and Principles of Securities Regulation is determined. Banking Supervision has been assessed to international principles in countries such as Austria, Bulgaria, Canada, Germany, Denmark, United Kingdom, Georgia, Hong Kong, Republic of Korea, Moldova, New Zealand, Russian Federation, Turkey, United States of America, South Africa, Insurance Supervision — Canada, Denmark, Hong Kong, Ireland, New Zealand, Turkey, United States of America, South Africa, securities market surveillance and financial supervision in general — Canada, Hong Kong, United States of America, South Africa. The work identifies key areas of modern and innovative development of the financial supervision system. The paper identifies key areas of modern and innovative development of the financial supervision. Our results showed that increasing the compliance of financial supervision with international standards can be ensured primarily through the introduction of risk-oriented financial supervision, improvement of corporate governance and disclosure of financial reporting by financial intermediaries.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".