MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399033690 · doi:10.1002/mde.4271

COVID‐19 and credit risk variation across banks: International insights

2024· article· en· W4399033690 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueManagerial and Decision Economics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Credit riskBusinessChinaFinancial systemVariation (astronomy)Quarter (Canadian coin)Pandemic2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)EconomicsActuarial scienceGeographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper focuses on utilizing non‐performing loans (NPLs) as the primary indicator of credit risk to analyze how various bank and country‐level characteristics influence changes in credit risk within and between banks across China, Europe, and the U.S. during the COVID‐19 period. Over 4,959 bank‐quarter observations (from Q4 2019 to Q4 2021), it becomes evident that COVID‐19 significantly contributes to the variation in NPLs, underscoring its adverse impact on credit risk. This pattern is consistent across all countries; however, Chinese banks exhibit more robust capabilities in managing credit risk exposure compared to their European and U.S. counterparts. These findings offer significant implications for policymakers, investors, and regulators who are concerned about the repercussions of global pandemics on financial institutions.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score0.774

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.247 · 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