MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389787477 · doi:10.53479/33799

The European Central Bank and financial stability: a quarter of a century of evolution and transformation (1998-2023)

2023· article· en· W4389787477 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Luis Gutiérrez de Rozas

Bibliographic record

VenueFinancial Stability Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMandateFinancial systemFinancial stabilityQuarter (Canadian coin)BusinessFinanceEconomicsAccountingPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the evolution of the mandate and tasks of the European Central Bank (ECB) in the field of financial stability since its establishment in 1998. Over this period, the significance of the ECB’s financial stability function has increased markedly, in parallel with the growth of macroprudential policy and driven by the institutional reforms stemming from the creation of the European Systemic Risk Board in 2010 and the start of the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) in 2014. To carry out its tasks, the ECB has a Financial Stability Committee, which is made up of representatives of the central banks and banking supervisory authorities of the SSM area – including the Banco de España – , that acts as an internal forum for the ECB’s governing bodies to prepare issues relating to the analysis of risks and vulnerabilities and national macroprudential policies in the banking union. Lastly, an overview is provided of the main ECB publications and public interventions in this field.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFinancial Stability ReviewSame topicGlobal Financial Crisis and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207