MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3149142843

Book Review: Daniel Beunza, Taking the Floor: Models, Morals, and Management in a Wall Street Trading Room

2020· article· en· W3149142843 on OpenAlexaff
Joel Gehman

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Regulation and Crises
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoralityFinancial crisisLawPoint (geometry)Key (lock)SociologyFinanceManagementLaw and economicsPolitical scienceBusinessEconomicsComputer scienceComputer securityKeynesian economics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drawing on research initiated in September 1999, Taking the Floor reports on a mixed-methods study of a Wall Street trading room, research that ultimately concluded in 2015. The key pivot for the book is the 2008 global financial crisis. Beunza’s jumping off point is “the recognition that the moral standards on Wall Street, and not simply the standards set by law, are critical to a healthy financial system” (p. 1). On this diagnosis, morals are essential to both the practice and study of finance. But such a conclusion only raises further questions: first, how is morality related to the crises experienced by banks and other financial organizations; and second, how can moral standards be improved on Wall Street?

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.600
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicGlobal Financial Regulation and CrisesFrench-language works237,207