Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Bank of Canada (BoC) activated its Contingent Term Repo Facility (CTRF) from April 2020 to April 2021 in response to liquidity strains in markets that stemmed from economic uncertainty and the COVID-19 pandemic. The facility complemented other BoC liquidity facilities by broadening access to the central bank’s repurchase (repo) operations beyond primary dealers and their affiliates, to large asset managers active in Canadian dollar money markets or fixed income markets. The CTRF offered one-month term funding to eligible counterparties on a bilateral basis against securities issued or guaranteed by the government of Canada or a provincial government. In the second quarter of 2020, the BoC lent CAD 291.8 million (USD 223 million) through the CTRF. BoC officials said the facility was “little used” because funding market conditions improved rapidly, and the facility’s pricing and terms meant “regular market sources of funding became more favorable.” Officials from large pension funds, which play a major role in Canadian repo markets, reported that though they accessed the CTRF for lower amounts, it helped restore their confidence by providing backstop repo rates, “[alleviating] some of the need to build up precautionary liquidity.”
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".