MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100020469

The Importance of Payday Loans in Canadian Consumer Insolvency

2007· article· en· W7100020469 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Statistical Modeling Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoanAccounts payableInsolvencyLegislatureTerm loanInterest rateConsumer protectionFinancial services
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the past twenty years, the alternative financial services industry has increased in use and importance in Canada, especially in urban areas as major banks and to some extent credit unions/caisses populaires have abandoned their branches in the inner cities. The most common of these are deferred deposit loan operations, most commonly known as payday lenders. Payday loans are short-term loans, usually under $1,000, advanced against a post-dated cheque, which is payable on the borrower’s next payday. These loans typically add a number of registration and other fees to the maximum rate legally available, and are often refinanced or “rolled over ” to the next payday with additional fees payable, making them the most expensive source of consumer credit available. The high interest rates, as expressed on an annual basis, have raised the attention of media and regulators, with some provinces (e.g., Manitoba) planning legislative controls on payday loans, which are currently under federal jurisdiction. The importance of these loans in consumer insolvency is largely unknown: Are they helping to fill the gap and allowing consumers to avoid bankruptcy, or are they just one more loan to add to an already overextended debtor, pushing him or her over the brink into bankruptcy?

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.574

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Statistical Modeling TechniquesFrench-language works237,207