MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3180397726 · doi:10.3390/jrfm14070312

Catch the Heterogeneity: The New Bank-Tailored Integrated Rating

2021· article· en· W3180397726 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Daniela Arzu, Marcella Lucchetta, Guido Max Mantovani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCredit Risk and Financial Regulations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDownside riskBusinessFrontierFinancial crisisNormativeFinancial marketEconomicsActuarial scienceFinanceMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article is to develop a bank-oriented rating approach, tailored by incorporating the various heterogeneity dimensions characterizing financial institutions, named “Bank-Tailored Integrated Rating” (BTIR). BTIR is able to catch the financial cycle, including the pandemic crisis, and the ongoing change in banking normative from a microeconomic perspective, and it is inherently coherent with the challenging frontier of forecasting tail risk in financial markets in similar ways as in De Nicolò and Lucchetta (2017), although their approach is macroeconomic) since it considers the downside risk in the theoretical framework. The method employed was an innovative integrated rating (IR) statistical and econometrical panel pre-selection analysis that takes into account the characteristics of risk and the greater heterogeneity of the banks. The result is a challenge rating procedure delivering forward-looking preselection requested by the new International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS-9). The future direction is extremely promising given the increase in idiosyncratic and systemic risks in financial markets.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.645
Threshold uncertainty score0.363

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicCredit Risk and Financial RegulationsFrench-language works237,207