MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362669636 · doi:10.3390/jrfm16040230

Impact of Financial Technology on Improvement of Banks’ Financial Performance

2023· article· en· W4362669636 on OpenAlex
H. Kent Baker, Thair A. Kaddumi, Mahmoud Nassar, Riham Muqattash

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbu dhabiStock exchangeBusinessVariablesFinTechPopulationFinancial systemFinanceVariable (mathematics)Financial servicesGeographyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the main financial technologies adopted by banks to improve their financial performance. The study population consists of commercial banks listed on the Amman Stock Exchange and Abu Dhabi Securities Exchange, and includes financial information and data from 2012 to 2020. A total of 115 questionnaires, consisting of five questionnaires for each bank, were distributed to the study population in Jordan and the United Arab Emirates. The dependent variable is financial performance, while the independent variable is financial technology (FinTech). Multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to test the hypotheses. The results showed that FinTech has a positive effect on both total deposit and net profits. This study recommends that banks be encouraged to adopt inclusive strategies to attain sustainable development.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.806

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.206 · 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