MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407849364 · doi:10.1016/j.jeconc.2025.100138

Unveiling sentiments of the cullen commission: Exploring AML compliance and regulation through deep learning techniques

2025· article· en· W4407849364 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mark Lokanan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Economic Criminology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Canadian institutionsRoyal Roads University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council
KeywordsCommissionCompliance (psychology)Political scienceLaw and economicsPublic administrationEnvironmental ethicsLawPsychologySociologyPhilosophySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the role of anti-money laundering (AML) regulations and compliance in combating money laundering and terrorist financing (ML/TF) in Canada. AML regulations establish guidelines for financial institutions to identify, prevent, and report suspicious activities. However, tensions often arise between AML compliance and regulation due to the challenges associated with implementing and adhering to AML regulations. This paper aims to investigate the sentiments expressed by individuals involved in AML compliance and regulation regarding the effectiveness of AML measures in the Canadian financial sector. The paper uses advanced deep learning (DL) methods like convolutional neural networks (CNN), recurrent neural networks with long short-term memory (RNN+LSTM), and pre-trained models like GloVe and BERT to explore emotions in the context of AML compliance and regulation. The findings indicate that DL models excel at accurately classifying sentiments from testimonies related to AML compliance and regulation. However, there are challenges in accurately capturing negative sentiments, which reflect the complexities and nuances associated with expressing criticisms about regulatory standards. The study emphasizes the importance of understanding the interplay between rational decision-making in compliance and the inherent conflicts with regulation. This article also highlights how DL models can potentially enhance sentiment analysis in the AML enterprise, enabling analysts to make decisions and policies based on financial intelligence. Nevertheless, DL models are not always easy to comprehend. Further research is needed to enhance the understandability and scalability of DL models when analyzing different AML datasets.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.226
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Economic CriminologySame topicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskFrench-language works237,207