Fintech Innovations in the Financial Service Industry
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Digital transformation underscored by the fourth industrial revolution has led to the emergence of sophisticated technology-enabled financial services known as fintech, that has swiftly altered traditional financial services space. Global adoption of fintech is rapidly increasing due to its disruptive nature and is largely embraced by participants who are underserved by traditional financial service providers. Global investments in fintech are growing rapidly year by year owing to increased interconnectivity with the digital revolution. Fintech is expansive, engulfing a plethora of innovative applications in various services including payments, financing, asset management, insurance, etc. There exists a gap in the literature and visualization research on impact and future pathway of fintech innovations in payments and financial services and role of financial regulations. This study aims to enrich the understanding of fintech innovations in payments and financing and investigate the correlation and significance of regulatory framework in maintaining a fair ecosystem. With this objective, an extant systematic review was performed using research articles published in peer-reviewed journals for the period 2014–2022 when there has been a burgeoning of interest in ‘fintech’ globally. The findings of this study contribute to the theoretical constructs of fintech innovations in the financial services industry and show that such innovations play a crucial role in shaping the nature of future of business. The results of this study have implications for researchers who could deploy this research as a reference point to get a holistic insight and a detailed mapping of innovations in fintech.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it