MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1529432581 · doi:10.5539/ass.v11n18p25

The Research on Financial Risk Investment Policy to High Technology Industry

2015· article· en· W1529432581 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fangwang Li, Wanzhen Wen

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPrivate Equity and Venture Capital
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsProfitability indexBusinessInvestment (military)Venture capitalFinanceTax policyIndustrial organizationEconomicsPublic economicsTax reform

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High technology industry with high risks and high profitability, it is because of these characteristics has attracted a lot of risk investment, the government as the main support of high technology industry, the integrated use of fiscal means such as tax and investment and financing to adjust the relationship between venture investors, venture capital company and venture enterprise. This paper introduces the two-period of partial equilibrium model, and analyses the question that how risk investment policy work on high technology industry with three aspects ranging from tax mechanism of risk investment behavior, mechanism of governmental risk investment policy to venture investors, to the influence of the tax policy for high technology enterprise on risk investment mechanism. And it points out that the governmental taxation type and tax base will affect the risk investors’ desire and high technology enterprise cost of capital, which influence the development of the high technology industry.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicPrivate Equity and Venture CapitalFrench-language works237,207