MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3142227663

Access to Financial Services for Tiny Businesses: What is the Role of Microcredit?

2005· article· en· W3142227663 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Toni Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueKent Academic Repository (University of Kent) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancial servicesBusinessFinancePublic sectorPublic policyCompetition (biology)Financial systemEconomicsEconomic growth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract for Book: Public policy considerations intersect with virtually everything the financial services sector does, yet governments make many public policy decisions without specific data on the Canadian marketplace. In Financial Services and Public Policy, contributors address this shortcoming by considering a wide range of concerns, including lending to small businesses, the role of microcredit and raising venture capital, the impact of state guarantees of pension plans, the structure and performance of credit unions, and maintaining competition after bank mergers. The financial services sector drives the Canadian economy. It is the banker, lender, broker, and insurer of millions of Canadians at every stage of their lives. It provides corporate finance, shapes the growth of small business, and assists individual Canadians to achieve their financial goals. It is a major employer all across the country. Canadian financial institutions are also active globally and are influenced by international as well as domestic policy issues and decisions. Financial Services and Public Policy lays the foundation for today's public policy debates and decisions that will shape Canada's financial services sector into the twenty-first century.

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)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0130.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.003

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKent Academic Repository (University of Kent)Same topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207