Bibliographic record
Abstract
With Canadian banks curtailing their funding in response to the Global Financial Crisis, liquidity dried up in money markets and bond markets. On October 14, 2008, the Bank of Canada (BoC) announced its first Private-Sector Term PRA facility to provide liquidity to large money-market participants, such as asset managers, who were not traditional BoC counterparties and could not access the BoC’s other emergency liquidity facilities (“PRA” is short for purchase and resale agreement, similar to a repo). The program accepted commercial paper, asset-backed commercial paper, and bankers’ acceptances as collateral. It complemented the BoC’s Term PRA for primary dealers (the “regular Term PRA”), which the BoC extended to major banks on the same day. The BoC was prepared to allocate CAD 1 billion (USD 0.8 billion) to weekly auctions for the Private-Sector Term PRA, but only CAD 25 million (the minimum amount) was taken up in any single week. On February 23, 2009, the BoC replaced this facility with its second Private-Sector Term PRA. The second facility added investment-grade corporate bonds as eligible collateral and expanded the list of eligible participants. The two Private-Sector Term PRAs saw much less use than the regular Term PRA, ultimately peaking at about CAD 3 billion outstanding in mid-2009. The BoC allowed the facility to expire on October 27, 2009.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".