Cited by 13Regulation and Compliance StudiesLegal and Constitutional StudiesFinancial Reporting and XBRL

Measuring and Modeling the U.S. Regulatory Ecosystem

Open access
Bommarito II, Michael J, Katz, Daniel Martin·2017·Journal of Statistical Physics

Abstract

Over the last 23 years, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has required over 34,000 companies to file over 165,000 annual reports. These reports, the so-called “Form 10-Ks,” contain a characterization of a company’s financial performance and its risks, including the regulatory environment in which a company operates. In this paper, we analyze over 4.5 million references to U.S. Federal Acts and Agencies contained within these reports to measure the regulatory ecosystem, in which companies are organisms inhabiting a regulatory environment. While individuals across the political, economic, and academic world frequently refer to trends in this regulatory ecosystem, far less attention has been paid to supporting such claims with large-scale, longitudinal data. In this paper, in addition to positing a model of regulatory ecosystems, we document an increase in the regulatory energy per filing, i.e., a warming “temperature.” We also find that the diversity of the regulatory ecosystem has been increasing over the past two decades. These findings support the claim that regulatory activity and complexity are increasing, and this framework contributes an important step towards improving academic and policy discussions around legal complexity and regulation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10955-017-1846-3

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The complexity of the law imposes real consequences for many individuals and organizations.

    “The complexity of the law [12–15] imposes real consequences for many individuals and organizations [16,17].”

    From GPT-4 passes the bar exam (2024) · cites this paper as [14]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bommarito II, M. J., & Katz, D. M.
Affiliations
Illinois Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
Journal of Statistical Physics
Published
2017-07-13
Volume
168
Issue
5
Pages
1125-1135
ISSN
  • 0022-4715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-9613
OpenAlex
W2746553823
Cited by
13
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3
FWCI
2.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Statistical Physics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bepress Legal Repository (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Regulation and Compliance Studies
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Legal and Constitutional Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Financial Reporting and XBRL
Keywords
regulatory complexity, legal complexity, regulatory diversity, 10-K filings, regulatory environment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review