MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203486771 · doi:10.53383/100079

International Real Estate Review

2007· article· en· W3203486771 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cynthia Holmes, Michael LaCour‐Little

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Real Estate Review · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrepayment of loanMortgage underwritingReal estateLoanMortgage insuranceDefaultBusinessMarket liquidityCommercial mortgage-backed securityNon-conforming loanSecondary marketActuarial scienceFinancial systemEconomicsMonetary economicsNon-performing loanFinanceReal estate investment trustCapitalization rateInsurance policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We combine loan data from distinct sources to compare and contrast multifamily mortgage lending in Canada and the U.S. After a general comparison of the multifamily housing markets in the two countries, we focus on loan pricing and non-price contract terms in the two environments. We find longer loan terms in the U.S. compared to Canada and attribute this to the greater liquidity available from a more established secondary mortgage market. We also find that while nominal rates are higher in Canada, mortgage spreads are actually lower, a result likely due to contract features that raise the cost of default for borrowers and restrict prepayments". In terms of loan performance, we found greater prepayment risk in U.S. mortgages and greater default risk in Canadian mortgages, although findings regarding default are limited by small sample size.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.014

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Real Estate ReviewSame topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207