Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 50 references

UKFin+: A Research Agenda for Financial Services

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This research agenda argues that UK financial services research should concentrate on six named challenges, from financial inclusion to sustainable finance, and that each requires collaboration across academia, industry, regulators…

desk verdict A clean, well-referenced funding agenda whose only real weak spot is the opaque workshop process behind the selection of six challenges. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.13389 v1 pith:4QI6ISI4 submitted 2024-11-20 cs.CE

Jing Chen , Karen Elliott , William Knottenbelt , Aad van Moorsel , Helen Orpin , Sheena Robertson , John Vines , Katinka Wolter This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CE
keywords financialservicesresearchagendainclusionwellbeinggame-changingtechnologiesregulatorycomplianceopenbankingresiliencesustainablefinance
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper, a deliverable of the UKFin+ network, proposes that the long-term health and competitiveness of UK financial services depend on research that tackles six named challenges: financial inclusion and wellbeing, game-changing technologies, regulatory compliance, trusted open banking, financial resilience and stability, and sustainable finance. It is aimed at academic researchers, funders, and practitioners, and it is explicitly not a comprehensive survey but an agenda to inspire collaborative proposals. The authors argue that these challenges are wicked problems requiring joined-up work across sectors and disciplines, and they arrange them in a layered map linking challenges to application areas, research areas, and cross-cutting enablers such as people, data, skills, and ethics.

What carries the argument

The carrying structure is a concentric challenge landscape with an outer ring of six real-life challenges, a ring of application areas, a ring of more fundamental research areas, and a central core of enablers. This map is paired with a spotlight mechanism under which one challenge at a time becomes the focus of funding calls and events, with financial inclusion and wellbeing first and game-changing technologies second. The map does the argumentative work by making every proposed project locatable: a non-academic partner can enter from a challenge and move inward to research, while an academic can enter from a research area and move outward to application and challenge.

What would settle it

A systematic, nationally representative consultation of UK financial services stakeholders, including consumers, small firms, and non-fintech incumbents, that yields a materially different set of top challenges would undercut the agenda's priority claims.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that six primary real-life challenges should organize UK financial services research over the coming years. For each challenge the authors supply concrete context and research directions: inclusion requires fair access plus financial wellbeing; game-changing technologies centre on AI, blockchain, and quantum computing; compliance needs quantitative metrics and regulatory sandboxes; open banking needs trust and consumer-centred data sharing; resilience requires modelling markets as complex adaptive systems; and sustainable finance needs verifiable, tradeable green instruments. The authors also identify enablers as the shared core without which work on any challenge stalls. The agenda is grounded in stakeholder workshops and aligned with sector surveys, and its purpose is to steer funding and collaboration rather than report new experimental findings.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the six challenges, drawn from UKFin+ stakeholder workshops, are the right priorities for the UK financial services sector; the workshops' participant composition and selection method are not described, and the document says it is not intended to be comprehensive.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the six challenges are the right framing, funding calls and events will keep clustering around them, making the opening spotlights a test of whether the agenda produces collaborative proposals.
  • Compliance research could deliver quantitative compliance metrics and language-model tools that turn regulation text into actionable checks, easing the documented regulatory burden.
  • A trusted open-banking regime built on consent and financial literacy would let consumers and small businesses assemble personalised products from data that once belonged only to banks.
  • Stability research would shift from overconfident simple models toward agent-based and generative simulations of markets as complex adaptive systems, including new ways to monitor systemic risk from cryptoassets.
  • Sustainable finance could move toward tokenized green bonds, carbon credits, and impact tokens that are easy to trade and hard to greenwash, with IoT and blockchain providing verification.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The spotlight schedule carries an urgency ordering the paper does not defend; a different workshop mix could plausibly reorder the six challenges.
  • The enabler layer implies a testable hypothesis the paper does not test: projects that explicitly budget for codesign, data quality, skills, and ethics will outperform those that do not.
  • Because the agenda is UK-centred, its challenge set is probably not fully portable; other countries might rank sustainable finance or financial resilience differently depending on market structure.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript is a research agenda document produced by the UKFin+ Network Plus consortium. It argues that the UK financial services sector faces six primary real-life challenges—financial inclusion and wellbeing, coping with game-changing technologies, regulatory compliance, trusted and effective open banking, financial resilience and stability, and sustainable finance—and that these challenges should structure collaborative research across academia, industry, and regulators. Each challenge is described in a dedicated subsection with references to UK-specific data and policy documents, and the agenda closes with a set of cross-cutting enablers (people, data, skills, codesign, collaboration, funding, ethics) and an outlook connecting the challenges to a payments-industry survey. The intended use is to inspire and align funding proposals for UKFin+ and other funders.

Significance. Taken on its own terms, the paper is a useful and clearly structured scoping document. Its strengths are that it is well referenced, internally coherent, and explicitly non-exhaustive, and it translates broad societal problems into concrete application and research areas that can be used to shape funding calls. The paper also gives credit to its consultative basis by acknowledging UKFin+ event participants. However, the central prioritisation claim—that the six named challenges are the primary ones for UK financial services—rests on stakeholder workshops whose design and representativeness are not reported. If the challenge set is intended to guide substantial public research funding, the evidentiary basis for that selection needs to be visible. The paper does not make falsifiable predictions or provide machine-checked derivations; its value is organisational and inspirational rather than empirical.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 4, Figure 1; Executive Summary] The claim that the six challenges are 'primary real-life challenges' and were 'identified through a series of stakeholder workshops' is load-bearing but unsupported. The manuscript nowhere describes the number of workshops, participant recruitment criteria, sector or seniority mix, format, or the analysis that turned workshop input into exactly these six categories (the Acknowledgements merely thank attendees of UKFin+ events). Because the agenda is explicitly intended to guide funding decisions and proposal alignment, a reader cannot tell whether the six challenges reflect the broader UK financial-services landscape or the specific UKFin+ network. I would ask for either a short methodology appendix describing the workshop process and its limitations, or a reframing of the claim to something like 'six challenges that UKFin+ stakeholders identified as salient', with 'primary' removed.
  2. [Section 4 and Section 6] The selection of the six challenges is not triangulated against systematic alternatives. Section 6 invokes a Payments Association survey as confirmation, but that survey covers only the payments subsector and is introduced after the six challenges have already been fixed. The manuscript should situate the challenge set relative to other UK financial-services priority exercises (for example, FCA business plans, HM Treasury and regulator strategies, or existing academic agenda articles) and explicitly discuss potential omissions such as operational resilience, data protection and privacy, and competition policy. This would strengthen the agenda's credibility without requiring a full Delphi or survey study.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 3] The word 'nuture' should be 'nurture'.
  2. [Section 4.6] The word 'multifacted' should be 'multifaceted'.
  3. [Section 4.2.2] The phrase 'Some of the the latter' contains a duplicated definite article.
  4. [Section 4.1] The phrase 'ones financial affairs' should be 'one's financial affairs'.
  5. [Section 5] The enabler subsection on data states that human-generated data is 'preferred' to synthetic data, but the cited evidence [41] supports a narrower claim about model collapse; please add a citation or qualify the preference claim.
  6. [References] Reference [1] appears to have a misspelled author name ('Argawal' should likely be 'Agarwal').

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is a synthesis and agenda, not a derivation, and its self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

This paper is a research agenda and literature synthesis, not a derivation chain with predictions or fitted parameters. Its central claim is that six primary real-life challenges face UK financial services (Financial Inclusion & Wellbeing, Game-Changing Technologies, Regulatory Compliance, Open Banking, Resilience & Stability, Sustainable Finance). These six challenges are presented as inputs arising from stakeholder workshops and cited evidence, not as outputs of a formal derivation. No equation is fitted to data and later renamed as a prediction. The only overlapping-author citations are reference [43] (Toreini et al., on trust in AI) and reference [48] (Werner et al., SoK on DeFi), both used to support background statements rather than to justify the agenda's central challenge set. These are published, externally accessible works and do not constitute a self-citation chain that forces the paper's conclusions. The workshop representativeness concern noted in the reader's take is a legitimate limitation about evidence quality, but it is a matter of sampling transparency and not a circularity of the kind this pass looks for. Therefore the paper is self-contained in the relevant sense and receives a score of 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no fitted parameters or invented entities. Its claims rest on policy context and a workshop-derived list of priorities that is not fully documented.

assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption The UK financial services sector is a critical pillar of the economy and its key problems are 'wicked problems' that demand cross-sector collaboration.
    Used throughout Sections 2 and 3 to justify the agenda's purpose; if this premise is wrong, the document has no reason to exist.
  • domain assumption The six challenge areas identified in Section 4 are the principal real-life challenges for UK financial services.
    This is the central categorization of the agenda, but the manuscript does not describe the workshop methodology that produced it, so it rests on undocumented input.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of UKFin+: A Research Agenda for Financial Services." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4QI6ISI4

@misc{pith2026241113389,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: UKFin+: A Research Agenda for Financial Services},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4QI6ISI4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.13389}
}
read the original abstract

This document presents a research agenda for financial services as a deliverable of UKFin+, a Network Plus grant funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council. UKFin+ fosters research collaborations between academic and non-academic partners directed at tackling complex long-term challenges relevant to the UK's financial services sector. Confronting these challenges is crucial to promote the long-term health and international competitiveness of the UK's financial services industry. As one route to impact, UKFin+ includes dedicated funding streams for research collaborations between academic researchers and non-academic organisations. The intended audience of this document includes researchers based in academia, academic funders, as well as practitioners based in industry, regulators, charities or NGOs. It is not intended to be comprehensive or exhaustive in scope but may provide applicants to UKFin+ funding streams and other funding bodies with inspiration for their proposals or at least an understanding of how their proposals align with the broader needs of the UK financial services industry.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.13389 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overview of Challenges [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Goals for the MaPS UK Strategy for Financial Wellbeing. Source: [27] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Overview of financially-specialised large language models (LLMs). Source: [30] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: How LLMs could enable phishing attacks and financial fraud at scale. Source: [15] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Overview of the Decentralised Finance Stack. Source: Fabian Sch¨ar [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Quantum Computing Technology Development Roadmap. Source: BCG Analysis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Priorities for Open Banking. Source: [10] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: A feedback-based multiagent stockmarket model. Source: [37] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: OpenSolar Architecture for the financing of distributed energy resources. Source: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Biggest challenges for payment sector going forward. Source: [34] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Biggest opportunities for payment sector. Source: [34] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Argawal, J

    A. Argawal, J. Gans, and A. Goldfarb. Power and Prediction: The Disruptive Economics of Artificial Intelligence . Harvard Business Review Press, 2022

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    Arner, R.P

    D.W. Arner, R.P. Buckley, D.A. Zetzsche, et al. Sustainability, FinTech and Financial Inclusion. Eur Bus Org Law Rev , 21:7–35, 2020

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Response to the Bank of England and HM trea- sury consultation paper: The digital pound: a new form of money for households and businesses?, 2024

    Bank of England and HM Treasury. Response to the Bank of England and HM trea- sury consultation paper: The digital pound: a new form of money for households and businesses?, 2024. Available online at https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/ files/paper/2024/responses-to-the-digital-pound-consultation-paper.pdf

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Project Genesis – Report 1: A vision for technology-driven green finance, 2021

    BIS Innovation Hub and Hong Kong Monetary Authority. Project Genesis – Report 1: A vision for technology-driven green finance, 2021. Available online at https://www.bis.org/publ/ othp43_report1.pdf

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Broby, A

    D. Broby, A. Daly, and D. Legg. Towards secure and intelligent regulatory technology (regtech):: A research agenda. Technology and Regulation , 2022:88–99, October 2022

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Embracing the uk’s open finance opportunity

    Centre for Finance, Innovation and Technology. Embracing the uk’s open finance opportunity. Inaugural Coalition Paper. Available online at https://cfit.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/ 2024/02/CFIT-Open-Finance-Blueprint.pdf

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Chang et al

    Y. Chang et al. A survey on evaluation of large language models. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology , 15, 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    State of the sector: Annual review of UK financial services 2023, 2023

    City of London and HM Treasury. State of the sector: Annual review of UK financial services 2023, 2023. Available online at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/ 64ad6d32fe36e0000d6fa6a9/State_of_the_sector_annual_review_of_UK_financial_ services_2023.pdf

    work page 2023

Show all 50 references
  1. [9]

    Reskilling everywhere all at once: Skills for the future of financial services, 2023

    Financial Services Skills Commission. Reskilling everywhere all at once: Skills for the future of financial services, 2023. Available online at https://wp.financialservicesskills.org/ wp-content/uploads/2023/04/FSSC-Future-Skills-23-Report-FINAL.pdf . 19

    2023

  2. [10]

    Recommendations for the next phase of open banking in the UK, April 2023

    Joint Regulatory Oversight Committee. Recommendations for the next phase of open banking in the UK, April 2023. Available online at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/ government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1150988/JROC_report_ recommendations_and_actions...

    2023

  3. [11]

    Day and P.J.H

    G.S. Day and P.J.H. Schoemaker. Wharton on Managing Emerging Technologies . John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2000

    2000

  4. [12]

    Edmans and M.T

    A. Edmans and M.T. Kacperczyk. Sustainable finance. Review of Finance, 69:1309–1313, 2022. Available online at https://ssrn.com/abstract=4285892

    2022

  5. [13]

    Preventing financial crime in cryptoassets: Identifying evolving crimi- nal behavior, 2024

    Elliptic. Preventing financial crime in cryptoassets: Identifying evolving crimi- nal behavior, 2024. Available online at https://www.elliptic.co/resources/ elliptic-typologies-report-2024

    2024

  6. [14]

    In the AI of the storm: How UK financial services firms are using AI, November 2023

    Gillmore Centre for Financial Technology. In the AI of the storm: How UK financial services firms are using AI, November 2023. Available online at https://www.wbs.ac.uk/research/ research-centres-and-networks/gillmore-centre-financial-technology/ ai-report/

    2023

  7. [15]

    Gressel, R

    G. Gressel, R. Pankajakshan, and Y. Mirsky. Discussion paper: Exploiting LLMs for scam automation: A looming threat. In Proc. 3rd ACM Workshop on the Security Implications of Deepfakes and Cheapfakes (WDC ’24)) , 2024

    2024

  8. [16]

    Flash loans and decentralized lending protocols: An in-depth analysis

    Florian Gronde. Flash loans and decentralized lending protocols: An in-depth analysis. Master’s thesis, Center for Innovative Finance, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland, 2020

    2020

  9. [17]

    Regulatory initiatives grid, November 2023

    HM Treasury et al. Regulatory initiatives grid, November 2023. Available online at https:// www.fca.org.uk/publication/corporate/regulatory-initiatives-grid-nov-2023. pdf

    2023

  10. [18]

    Select committee on financial exclusion tackling financial exclusion: A coun- try that works for everyone? HL Paper 132, March 2017

    House of Lords. Select committee on financial exclusion tackling financial exclusion: A coun- try that works for everyone? HL Paper 132, March 2017. Available online at https: //publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201617/ldselect/ldfinexcl/132/13202.htm

    2017

  11. [19]

    Green bond principles, 2022

    ICMA. Green bond principles, 2022. Available online at https://www. icmagroup.org/assets/documents/Sustainable-finance/2022-updates/ Green-Bond-Principles-June-2022-060623.pdf

    2022

  12. [20]

    Data age 2025: The digitization of the world from edge to core, 2018

    IDC. Data age 2025: The digitization of the world from edge to core, 2018. Available online at https://www.seagate.com/files/www-content/our-story/trends/ files/idc-seagate-dataage-whitepaper.pdf

    2025

  13. [21]

    Joseph, R

    D. Joseph, R. Misoczki, M. Manzano, et al. Transitioning organizations to post-quantum cryptography. Nature, 605:237–243, 2022

    2022

  14. [22]

    Krizhevsky, I

    A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, and G.E. Hinton. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 25, 2012

    2012

  15. [23]

    Lankton and D.H

    N.K. Lankton and D.H. McKnight. What does it mean to trust facebook? examining technology and interpersonal trust beliefs. ACM SIGMIS Database: The DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems, 42(2):32–54, 2011

    2011

  16. [24]

    Maino, C

    L. Maino, C. Martindale, L Panny, G. Pope, and B. Wesolowski. A direct key recovery attack on SIDH. In Advances in Cryptology – EUROCRYPT 2023 , pages 448–471. Springer Nature Switzerland, 2023. 20

    2023

  17. [25]

    Markus, J.A

    A.F. Markus, J.A. Kors, and P.R. Rijnbeek. The role of explainability in creating trustworthy artificial intelligence for health care: A comprehensive survey of the terminology, design choices, and evaluation strategies. Journal of Biomedical Informatics , page 103655, 2021

    2021

  18. [26]

    J. McCrea. UK unicorn companies. Available online at https://www.beauhurst.com/ research/unicorn-companies/. Accessed September 2024

    2024

  19. [27]

    The UK strategy for financial wellbeing 2020–2030, 2020

    Money and Pensions Service. The UK strategy for financial wellbeing 2020–2030, 2020. Available online at https://maps.org.uk/content/dam/ maps-corporate/en/our-work/uk-strategy-for-financial-wellbeing/ maps-uk-strategy-for-financial-wellbeing-2020-2030.pdf

    2020

  20. [28]

    Mosca and M

    M. Mosca and M. Piani. Quantum threat timeline report 2023, 2023. Available online at https: //globalriskinstitute.org/publication/2023-quantum-threat-timeline-report/

    2023

  21. [29]

    Nakamoto

    S. Nakamoto. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system, 2008. Available online at https: //bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

    2008

  22. [30]

    Nie et al

    Y. Nie et al. A survey of large language models for financial applications: Progress, prospects and challenges, 2024. Available online at https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.11903

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Noguer i Alonso

    M. Noguer i Alonso. Economy and financial markets as complex systems model- ing the economy: A new framework, January 2024. Available online at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4684075

    2024

  24. [32]

    State of AI in financial services: 2024 trends, 2024

    NVIDIA. State of AI in financial services: 2024 trends, 2024. Available online at https: //resources.nvidia.com/en-us-2024-fsi-survey/ai-financial-services

    2024

  25. [33]

    Economic indicators: Number 02786, August 2024

    House of Commons Library. Economic indicators: Number 02786, August 2024. Avail- able online at https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN02786/ SN02786.pdf

    2024

  26. [34]

    Pay 360: State of the industry survey, 2023

    Payments Association/Pay360. Pay 360: State of the industry survey, 2023. Avail- able online at https://pay360event.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2023/07/5904_ Pay360_2024_Infographic_V4.pdf

    2023

  27. [35]

    Plaitakis and S

    A. Plaitakis and S. Staschen. Open banking: How to design for financial in- clusion. Consultative Group to Assist the Poor (CGAP)/World Bank: Work- ing Paper, 2020. Available online at https://documents.worldbank.org/ en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/35188162513...

    2020

  28. [36]

    Financial inclusion report 2024: A divided nation

    Plend. Financial inclusion report 2024: A divided nation. Available online at https://assets-global.website-files.com/64620846446d0cb110c5f31f/ 661f835fe7df160ada04f010_Plend_Financial_Inclusion_Report_ 2024-a-divided-nation.pdf

    2024

  29. [37]

    Provenzano

    D. Provenzano. An artificial stock market in a system dynamics approach. In Proc. 2002 International System Dynamics Society Conference , 2002

    2002

  30. [38]

    The total tax contribution of UK-based financial and related professional services

    PwC. The total tax contribution of UK-based financial and related professional services. Research Report, commissioned by the City of London Corporation and TheCityUK, May 2024. Available online at https://www.theglobalcity.uk/PositiveWebsite/media/Research-reports/ The-Total-...

    2024

  31. [39]

    K. Qin, L. Zhou, B. Livshits, and A. Gervais. Attacking the DeFi ecosystem with flash loans for fun and profit. In Proc. International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security (FC 2021), 2021

    2021

  32. [40]

    T. Ritchey. Wicked problems: Modelling social messes with morphological analysis. Acta Morphologica Generalis, 2, 2013

    2013

  33. [41]

    Shumailov, Z

    I. Shumailov, Z. Shumaylov, Y. Zhao, N. Papernot, R. Anderson, and Y. Gal. AI models collapse when trained on recursively generated data. Nature, 631:755–759, 2024

    2024

  34. [42]

    Srinivasan

    R. Srinivasan. Sources, characteristics and effects of emerging technologies: Research opportu- nities in innovation. Industrial Marketing Management , 37(6):633–640, 2008

    2008

  35. [43]

    Toreini, M

    E. Toreini, M. Aitken, A. van Moorsel, K. Elliott, and K. Coopamootoo. The relationship between trust in AI and trustworthy machine learning technologies. In Proc. ACM Fairness, Accountability and Transparency Conference , 2020

    2020

  36. [44]

    Trischler, S.J

    J. Trischler, S.J. Pervan, S.J. Kelly, and D.R. Scott. The value of codesign: The effect of customer involvement in service design teams. Journal of Service Research , 21(1):75–100, 2018

    2018

  37. [45]

    A. Turner. The crisis, conventional economic wisdom, and public policy. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(5):1317–1329, 08 2010

    2010

  38. [46]

    The impact of AI in financial services: Opportunities, risks and policy considerations, 2023

    UK Finance and Oliver Wyman. The impact of AI in financial services: Opportunities, risks and policy considerations, 2023. Available online at https://www.ukfinance.org.uk/system/ files/2023-11/The%20impact%20of%20AI%20in%20financial%20services.pdf

    2023

  39. [47]

    Vaswani et al

    A. Vaswani et al. Attention is all you need. arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.03762, 2017

    2017 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Werner, D

    S. Werner, D. Perez, L. Gudgeon, A. Klages-Mundt, D. Harz, and W.J. Knottenbelt. SoK: De- centralised Finance (DeFi). In Proc. 4th ACM Conference on Advances in Financial Technologies (AFT 2022), 2022

    2022

  41. [49]

    G. Wood. Ethereum: A secure decentralised transaction ledger, 2014. Available online at https://ethereum.github.io/yellowpaper/paper.pdf

    2014

  42. [50]

    Xiong and J

    X. Xiong and J. Luo. Global trends in cryptocurrency regulation: An overview. In Proc. 5th International Conference on Mathematical Research for Blockchain Economy (MARBLE 2024) , 2024. 22

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.