MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402932093 · doi:10.62051/sk650x12

Causes and Effects of the Global Financial Crisis - A Comparative Analysis of Previous Financial Crises

2024· article· en· W4402932093 on OpenAlexaff
Ruofei Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions on Social Science Education and Humanities Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancial crisisFinancial systemBusinessEconomicsFinancial analysisFinanceMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the causes and effects of the global financial crisis and to reveal its common features and unique factors by comparing financial crises in different historical periods. The study shows that excessive leverage, inadequate financial regulation and international capital flows are the main causes of the crisis, while policy failures, external shocks and internal vulnerabilities are the unique background of each crisis. Financial crises had far-reaching macroeconomic, financial market and socio-political impacts, leading to slower economic growth, rising unemployment, collapsing market confidence and social unrest. In order to effectively respond to financial crises, countries should strengthen financial regulation and risk control, improve the international financial system and enhance national economic resilience. Through the implementation of comprehensive policy measures and enhanced international cooperation, the global economy can better respond to the challenges posed by the financial crisis and lay the foundation for long-term prosperity and stability.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions on Social Science Education and Humanities ResearchSame topicGlobal Financial Crisis and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207