MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1780092673 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v7n8p12

Capital Structure of Property Companies–Evidence from Bursa Malaysia

2015· article· en· W1780092673 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdul Razak Abdul Hadi, Hamidi Yusoff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)Capital structureEarnings per shareShare priceEconomicsEarningsMarket value addedPositive correlationBook valueEconometricsRegression analysisValue (mathematics)Positive relationshipBusinessEnterprise valueAccountingFinanceStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is to examine the relevance of company’s capital structure in influencing its value. Within the framework of capital structure theories, this study uses Pearson Correlation methodology and Simple OLS Regression in measuring the strength of relationship between degree of leverage and share price. In using yearly time series data from January 2004 to December 2013, this study also measures the effect of earnings per share (EPS) on share price. It is found that EPS has more pervasive effect as compared to leverage in influencing firm’s value. 45 out of 55 sample companies demonstrate positive relationship between EPS and share prices. However, only 31% shows significant relationship between EPS and share price. It is thus evident that the Modigliani-Miller theory provides better clarification compared to the Trade-Off theory in explaining Malaysian property firm’s value.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicCorporate Finance and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207