MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415269080 · doi:10.69554/aljj7247

The payments industry in Canada

2025· article· en· W4415269080 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gillian Monckton, Peter Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of payments strategy & systems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBanking stability, regulation, efficiency
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClearingPaymentSettlement (finance)Competition (biology)Payment systemDirect Payments

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the unique role of Payments Canada, the owner and operator of national clearing and settlement systems in Canada. As a public-purpose organisation established through legislation, Payments Canada plays a critical role in advancing initiatives to modernise payments, and promote greater innovation and competition in Canada. This includes broadening access to Canada’s payment infrastructure through expanded Payments Canada membership eligibility, the launch of a real-time payment system, and modernising the retail batch system. Working alongside its members, participants, regulators and other stakeholders, Payments Canada is prepared for the changing payments ecosystem, both today and into the future. This is as more Canadians are adopting electronic and digital payments, despite continuing to use paper-based options. Enhancements to the national Automated Clearing Settlement System will continue to provide participants with a cost-efficient mechanism for low-value and less urgent payments. Additionally, the Real-Time Rail will have the ability for centralised fraud capabilities immediately at go-live. Engagement among regulators, members and other stakeholders will help drive these initiatives. This article is also included in the Business & Management Collection which can be accessed at https://hstalks.com/business/.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.858

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of payments strategy & systemsSame topicBanking stability, regulation, efficiencyFrench-language works237,207