MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410732839 · doi:10.1016/j.bir.2025.05.013

Network readiness, financial inclusion, and sustainable development goals: Insights from a clustering approach

2025· article· en· W4410732839 on OpenAlexaff
Mirjana Jemović, Ivana Marković, Adela Ljajić, Srđan Marinković

Bibliographic record

VenueBorsa Istanbul Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEconomic Growth and Development
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersFP7 Coordination of Research ActivitiesHorizon Therapeutics
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)Financial inclusionCluster analysisSustainable developmentBusinessFinancePsychologyComputer scienceFinancial servicesPolitical scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research examines the role of the financial sector in advancing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by promoting access to financial services and leveraging Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). Utilizing the k-means++ algorithm, we clustered 41 European countries based on the values of the Network Readiness Index (NRI) pillars—serving as a measure of ICT—and by the achieved values for SDG indicator 8.10, which reflects access to financial services. The results confirmed that cluster differences based on NRI components are significant, particularly with respect to: ownership of accounts with banks, other financial institutions, and mobile-money-service providers; sociodemographic characteristics of financial service users; and contributions to 13 out of the 17 SDGs. Notably, in terms of the impact of financial service access on SDG performance, significant differences between clusters were found in eight out of the 17 SDGs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBorsa Istanbul ReviewSame topicEconomic Growth and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207