Structure of the canadian housing markets and finance system. Bank of Canada, at http : //www.bis.org/publ/cgfs26cbpapers.htm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Historically, the housing finance sector has not been a major source of risk to financial institutions in Canada and, more generally, to the stability of the Canadian financial system as a whole. The Canadian housing finance market is national- ie lending conditions and mortgage products are similar across the country- and is largely dominated by domestic lenders, especially by a few well capitalised banks. The mortgage credit culture in Canada is rather conservative, with a large majority of mortgages at fixed interest rates and a preference for mortgage terms of five years. Interest bearing term instruments sold to savers remain the primary source of funding for mortgage loans, which subsequently remain largely on the balance sheet of lenders. While the government’s influence in the housing market is limited, it is more significant in the housing finance system, essentially through the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). The various government initiatives in this area have aimed to increase the supply of mortgage loans from private lenders. These initiatives have impacted the Canadian housing finance system, as reflected by the current significant share of high ratio mortgages- ie, mortgages where the down payment is lower than 25 % of the value of the property and which must be insured- and by the recent trend towards increasing off-balance sheet funding based on mortgage-backed securities created from insured
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.067 | 0.010 |
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".