Comparative Analysis of Credit Unions of the North America and Ukraine Сравнительный анализ кредитных союзов Северной Америки и Украины
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is devoted to the study of the market of financial services of the North American countries with the aim to analyse activity of credit union and comparison with the results of operation of credit unions of Ukraine. It determines principles of activity and models of credit unions, strengths and legislative support of development. The article provides results of comparative analysis of the system of credit unions of Canada, United States and Ukraine by main indicators, such as level of assets and liabilities, and number of credit unions and their clients in the context of the studied states. It separately considers a structure of target types of crediting in the context of the countries. It analyses activity of credit unions established by Ukrainian immigrants in the territory of Canada. It forms recommendations on support of domestic organisations at the state level using example of North American states. Статья посвящена исследованию рынка финансовых услуг стран Северной Америки с целью анализа деятельности кредитных союзов и сопоставления с результатами работы кредитных союзов Украины. Определены принципы деятельности и модели кредитных союзов, сильные стороны и законодательная поддержка развития. В статье приведены результаты сравнительного анализа системы кредитных союзов Канады, США и Украины по основным показателям, таким, как уровень активов и пассивов, количество кредитных союзов и их клиентов в разрезе исследуемых государств. Отдельно рассмотрена структура целевых видов кредитования в разрезе стран. Проанализирована деятельность кредитных союзов, основанных украинскими эмигрантами на территории Канады. Сформированы рекомендации по поддержке отечественных организаций на государственном уровне по примеру североамериканских государств.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".