MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimal Expansion Financing and Prior Financial Structure<sup>*</sup>

2011· article· en· W1946879992 on OpenAlex
Sudipto Sarkar

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Finance · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCapital Investment and Risk Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapital structureDebt-to-capital ratioLeverage (statistics)Profitability indexDebtFinanceEconomicsInternal financingCorporate financeAgency costMonetary economicsEquity ratioReturn on equityCorporate governanceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This paper identifies jointly the optimal investment trigger and the optimal financing package for a corporate expansion project, using a real‐option ‘trade‐off’ model with agency problems. It also identifies the optimal initial capital structure of the firm (before the expansion). We show that it is generally optimal to use more debt than equity to finance the expansion. The other results are as follows: (i) existing debt has a negative effect, while the debt component of expansion financing has a positive effect, on investment; (ii) the debt component of the optimal expansion financing package is a decreasing function of the pre‐expansion leverage ratio (consistent with mean reverting leverage ratios), and is also decreasing in the magnitude of the expansion opportunity; and (iii) the optimal pre‐expansion leverage ratio is a decreasing function of both the firm's profitability and the magnitude of the growth opportunity. These relationships are generally consistent with empirical evidence, and help reconcile the trade‐off theory of capital structure with apparently contradictory empirical evidence.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score0.711

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.210 · 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