MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011866710 · doi:10.1016/j.rfe.2013.04.001

The value implications of restrictions on asset sales

2013· article· en· W2011866710 on OpenAlex

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

VenueReview of Financial Economics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsTellabs (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsset (computer security)Enterprise valueBusinessAgency costNet asset valueDebtValue (mathematics)EconomicsFinanceLimitingRestructuringFlexibility (engineering)Asset turnoverMonetary economicsMicroeconomicsProfitability indexReturn on assetsCorporate governanceShareholder

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper examines the effect of restrictions over asset disposition, measured by the ratio of secured debt to fixed assets, on firm value. We find evidence consistent with two non‐mutually exclusive hypotheses. (1) Restrictions on the disposition of assets reduce firm value by limiting a firm's ability to restructure assets or to raise funds to finance higher NPV projects. (2) Restrictions on asset disposition increase firm value by limiting agency costs of managerial discretion over uncommitted assets. The net effect of restrictions over asset disposition on firm value is determined by potential agency problems and the need for operating flexibility.

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 score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.208 · 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