MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sovereign Risk

2015· other· en· W4256334062 on OpenAlexaffabout
Philip Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Encyclopedia of Management · 2015
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDefaultSovereign defaultSovereign creditCredit riskCredit default swapFinancial systemBusinessDebtSovereigntyCountry riskCredit ratingEconomicsPoliticsFinanceSovereign debtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sovereign risk is the likelihood that sovereign debt issuers will default. The debt/GDPratio of a country is a popular but partial indicator for such a likelihood. When a state defaults because of a shortage of foreign reserves, it may forbid its private sector borrowers from remitting foreign exchange to their international lenders. For that reason, private sector international loans are always under the shadow of sovereign risk. The decision to default depends not only on the financial “ability” of the state but also the “willingness” to pay. Thus, sovereign default is both an economic and a political decision. Sovereign default was prevalent throughout history in industrialized as well as developing countries. Among theG7countries, only the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada have no history of default. The three international rating agencies Moody, Standard and Poor, and Fitch provide sovereign credit rating but their track records are far from perfect. Other ways to evaluate sovereign risk include statistical modeling and market‐based measurements such as sovereign credit‐default swaps (CDS) and the price of debt at the secondary sovereign debt 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 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)0.011
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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1180.037

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWiley Encyclopedia of ManagementSame topicGlobal Financial Crisis and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207