Analysis of the Global Banking Network by Random Matrix Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the financial crisis of 2008, the network analysis of financial systems has attracted a lot of attention. In this paper, we analyze the global banking network via the method of Random Matrix Theory. By applying that method on a cross border lending network, it is shown that while the connectivity between different parts of the network has risen and the profile of transactions has diversified, the role of hubs remains important in the weighted perspective. The largest eigenvalue of the transaction matrix as the leading mode of the system shows sharp growth since 2002. As well, it is observed that its growth has diminished since 2008. This indicates that the crisis of 2008 has left a long-lasting footprint on the financial system. Analyzing the mean value of the participation ratio reveals the fact that the role of countries in forming small modes, has increased since 2002. In our final analysis, we provide snapshots of the hubs in the network over time. We observe that the share of countries in total transactions is not equal to their share in shaping the eigenvector of the largest eigenvalue. In 2018 for example, while the United Kingdom leads the share of transactions, it is the United States that has the largest value in the leading eigenvector. The proposed technique in the paper can be useful for analyzing different types of interaction networks between countries.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".