Amendments required in the legal and regulatory framework for the introduction of Islamic retail-banking products in Canadian banks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Islamic finance has made its first steps in Canada; however, there is still a lack of Islamic financial products in the country. The Muslim community still struggles nowadays in finding retail-banking products that do not contravene their religion. In fact, there are some Islamic financial institutions in Canada; however, these face many challenges as to the legal and regulatory framework of the financial system. The literature has proven that for the success of Islamic finance it has to start from the Canadian banks that have full support from the government and a well established and powerful presence in the country; in the current legal and regulatory framework of the Canadian banking system represents an obstacle as to the offering of Islamic retail-banking products in Canadian banks. This research deeply delved in the study of the Canadian legal and regulatory framework and found that there are various amendments to be made in this framework for the offering of Islamic retail-banking products in Canada, the most important ones being in the Bank Act as well as some other amendments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".