MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416372380 · doi:10.1086/mfj37030045

Underwriters and Broker-Dealers: What’s All the Paperwork About?

2016· article· en· W4416372380 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMunicipal Finance Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSecurities Regulation and Market Practices
Canadian institutionsNickel Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnderwritingRulemakingIssuerEnforcementCommissionSecurities Exchange Act of 1934Legislation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Starting at the beginning of 2012, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) undertook several initiatives to change the practices of underwriters in the municipal securities market to better protect both investors and issuers. This article discusses how recent enforcement actions and other regulatory actions, including the Municipalities Continuing Disclosure Cooperation Initiative and the National Exam Program Risk Alert, have altered underwriters’ responsibilities and their relationships with issuers; how the Municipal Advisor Rule and subsequent MSRB rulemaking have affected underwriters’ ability to provide issuers with guidance in structuring financing; what issuers can expect from underwriters moving forward and what new responsibilities issuers must assume; and how the market has responded with new products as a result of these regulations and requirements.

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.

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 categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0010.005
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.223 · 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