MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404731361 · doi:10.55041/ijsrem39126

Global Banking Regulations and Performance: A Study of Basel III Implementation in Developing and Developed Nations

2024· article· en· W4404731361 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Deepika Dhawan

Bibliographic record

VenueINTERANTIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH IN ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBanking stability, regulation, efficiency
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasel IIBusinessBasel IIIInternational bankingBasel IOperational riskFinancial systemAccountingFinanceCapital requirementEconomicsRisk managementMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the impact of Basel III regulations on bank performance in both developing and developed countries. A stable financial system is recognized as a key driver of economic growth, with banks playing a central role in facilitating technological advancements and economic development. However, advancements in global banking, alongside financial crises such as the 2007-08 global downturn, have highlighted the need for robust risk management frameworks. The Basel norms, particularly Basel III, were introduced to strengthen capital requirements, liquidity buffers, and supervisory processes to mitigate systemic risks. This research compares the effects of Basel III on banks in five developing countries (Bangladesh, India, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Thailand) and five developed countries (Canada, France, Germany, the UK, USA), focusing on changes in efficiency and productivity. By examining these countries' progress in Basel III implementation, the study offers valuable insights into how global banking regulations impact bank performance, highlighting differences across economic contexts and contributing to a deeper understanding of financial sector 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 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)0.004
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 score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINTERANTIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH IN ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENTSame topicBanking stability, regulation, efficiencyFrench-language works237,207