MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406020526 · doi:10.69554/hodu9765

COVID-19 has not killed merchant acceptance of cash: Results from the 2023 Merchant Acceptance Survey

2024· article· en· W4406020526 on OpenAlexaffabout
Angelika Welte, Katrina Talavera, Liang Wang, Joy Y. Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of digital banking. · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsBank of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CashBusiness2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)MedicineVirologyFinanceInternal medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the rise in digital payments has spurred a discussion in Canada and other countries about the future of cash at the point of sale. To better understand trends in payment methods accepted by Canadian businesses, including cash acceptance and the impact of innovations such as mobile payments, the Bank of Canada conducts the Merchant Acceptance Survey, a survey of small and medium-sized businesses. This report finds that 96 per cent of these businesses in Canada accepted cash in 2023. Acceptance of debit and credit cards has increased since 2021 to 89 per cent, and acceptance of digital payments has increased as well. The vast majority of merchants (92 per cent), however, have no plans to go cashless in the future. This paper concludes that cash and digital payments continue to coexist at the point of sale, and Canada is far from being a cashless society.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of digital banking.Same topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207