Since the resulting regulators are derived from approximations of the nonlinear dynamics, they are further enhanced in real-time with online learning/adaptive optimization, according to performance measurements.
Aware of the danger of an immediate feeding frenzy, and the sweeping layoffs and economic dislocation that might result, regulators in the home states -- Massachusetts, New York and New Jersey -- of the three big companies have thrown up barriers to takeover for at least two or three years after they go public.
In the official stress test results, regulators published losses only on credit cards held on bank balance sheets.
As a result, regulators around the world have been taking measures to increase the capital loss buffers at their banks.
As a result, regulators have struggled to react to seismic changes in the industry, like the rise of hedge funds and the proliferation of financial products that are traded in the shadows among firms, rather than openly on exchanges.
As a result, regulators crafting future rules would quite likely find themselves restricted from using some of the most consequential environmental research of recent decades, such as studies linking air pollution to premature deaths or work that measures human exposure to pesticides and other chemicals.
As a result, regulators are relying more heavily on policy to drive their strategy, actions, and outcomes.
As a result, regulators may take a harder look at whether these kinds of policies are adequately reserved for.
The result: Regulators lose track of large quantities of toxic chemicals and cancer-causing metals.
As a result, regulators use a series of default assumptions and exposure factors when conducting exposure assessments.
