MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405184526 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17120550

Conceptualizing an Institutional Framework to Mitigate Crypto-Assets’ Operational Risk

2024· article· en· W4405184526 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Deepankar Roy, Ayushman Dubey, Daitri Tiwary

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperational riskRisk managementBusinessAsset (computer security)Systemic riskBusiness operationsFinanceAccountingRisk analysis (engineering)EconomicsComputer securityMarketingComputer scienceFinancial crisis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extent ecosystems of crypto financial assets (crypto-assets) lack parity and coherence across the globe. This asymmetry is further heightened with a knowledge gap in operational risk management, wherein the global landscape of crypto-assets is characterized by unprecedented external risks and internal vulnerabilities. In this study, we present a critical examination and comprehensive analysis of current crypto-asset operational guidelines across geographies. We benchmark these guidelines to the Basel Committee for Banking Supervision (BCBS) risk classification framework for crypto-assets, identifying gaps in the operations across organizations. We, hence, conceptualize a novel institutional framework which may help in understanding and mitigating the gaps in operational risks’ regulation of crypto-assets. Our proposed Crypto-asset Operational Risk Management (CORM) framework determines how operational risk associated with crypto-assets of financial institutions can be mitigated to respond to the increasing demand for crypto-assets, cross border payments, electronic money, and cryptocurrencies, across countries. Applicable to firms irrespective of their size and scale of operations, CORM aligns with global regulatory initiatives, facilitating compliance and fostering trust among stakeholders. Strengthening our argument of CORM’s applicability, we present its efficacy in the form of alternate hypothetical outcomes in two distinct real-life cases wherein crypto-asset exchanges succumbed to either external risks, such as hacking, or internal vulnerabilities. It paves the way for future regulatory response with a structured approach to addressing the unique operational risks associated with crypto-assets. The framework advocates for collaborative efforts among industry stakeholders, ensuring its adaptability to the rapidly evolving crypto landscape. It further contributes to the establishment of a more resilient and regulated financial ecosystem, inclusive of crypto-assets. By implementing CORM, institutions can navigate the complexities of crypto-assets while safeguarding their interests and promoting sustainable growth in the digital asset market.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityFrench-language works237,207