Analysis of cash holding for measuring the efficiency of cash management: A study on IT sector
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For measuring the efficiency of management of cash, cash holding is one of the most important financial decisions that the manager of the concerned organization, has to make in the organization. Basically, it is observed that the organization hold cash for future purposes is very negligible. If the organization invested cash in profitable securities then there is some flexibility but when it relates to the capital market holding cash is not advantageous. Generally two contradictory theories such as Trade-off theory and the Pecking order theory are considered for measuring the efficiency of cash management. In this study we generally observed measured the efficiency of Cash Management influenced by Cash Holding. We also measured whether cash holding of the organization is affected with the degree of financial leverage, size of the organization, investment and profitability. This study helps us to understand the influence of DFL, Investment and Size of the organization on Cash holding. Proper holding of cash in cash management can prevent the bankruptcy of any organization and also increases the efficiency of Cash or Liquidity management.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it