MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Leasing in Russia: A Case Study

2006· article· en· W1990319304 on OpenAlexaff
Sergey V. Pakhtusov, Darlene Bay

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of International Financial Management and Accounting · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRussia and Soviet political economy
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislatureLegislationRussian economyBusinessMarket economyGovernment (linguistics)Inflation (cosmology)State (computer science)Planned economyEconomic policyEconomicsEconomic systemEconomyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As Russia goes through the process of converting from a command to a market economy, many old business processes and standards had to be terminated and new methods implemented. Leasing is an example of a technique long in use in more developed economies that has been transplanted to Russia, with changes made to reflect the particular circumstances there. This paper examines the current state of leasing in Russia by concentrating on the experiences of one leasing company: Volgopromleasing. Interest rates and inflation rates that fluctuate widely and are sometimes extremely high, as well as a legislative environment that may be expected to change are some of the challenges faced by the firm. However, compensating opportunities exist: many Russian firms desperately need to update their equipment, the government is strongly interested in promoting rapid economic growth, and the legislation currently in effect favors leasing over other methods of acquiring fixed assets. Although leasing has the potential to assist Russian firms in modernizing and growing, and, therefore, to help the Russian economy in its effort to rapidly move to a new market economy, this can only occur in conjunction with other economic initiatives that also provide for growth and stabilization.

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 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.332
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of International Financial Management and AccountingSame topicRussia and Soviet political economyFrench-language works237,207