Understanding Regulatory Changes: Deep Learning in Sustainable Finance and Banking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the regulatory impact on the European Banking Sector using advanced deep learning techniques to analyze the relationship between Sustainable Finance guidelines and the SX7P Index from January 2012 to December 2023. Utilizing Long Short-Term Memory Auto-encoder (LSTM-AE), Variational Autoencoder (VAE), and Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) for anomaly detection, the study compares anomalies and investigates their correlation with European Banking Authority (EBA) events and Sustainable Finance guidelines from January 2020 to December 2023. Through the analysis of 43 pertinent EBA documents, the research identifies patterns and variations in anomalies, assessing their association with regulatory changes. The results reveal significant anomalies aligning with regulatory events, indicating a potential causal relationship. Notably, the VAE methodology shows the strongest correlation between EBA Sustainable Finance events and anomalies. This research advances the understanding of deep learning applications in financial markets and offers valuable insights for policymakers and financial institutions regarding regulatory shifts in Sustainable Finance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".