MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W11361225

Financing trade asset procurement and disposal on joint equity basis for MMES: an analysis of some vital Shariah and operational aspects

2010· article· en· W11361225 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muhammad Abdurrahman Sadique

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinanceBusinessProcurementEquity (law)DebtFactoring
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Debt financing arrangements utilised in financing trade goods and produce ready for disposal, usually based on structures adapted from factoring mechanisms, involve shortcomings from a shariah as well as a commercial perspective. Financing MMEs that have stocks ready for disposal could be advantageously carried out on equity basis. Measures that result in altering the agreed profit sharing ratio merely in view of the financial interests of one party could affects the consistency of equity relationships. Recognising additional costs incurred during the equity relationship as infusion of additional capital could lead to anomalous outcomes. Treating such expenses as debts incurred by the venture for which the partners are jointly liable could be more preferable from a shariah perspective. In financing asset procurement for MMEs, debt instruments appear especially inadequate. Adopting the equity structure as a comprehensive scheme embracing all stages from procurement of assets until their disposal, could help rectify some shortcomings inherent to debt financing arrangements.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207