MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021391364 · doi:10.1139/l08-134

Capital structure optimization for build–operate–transfer (BOT) projects using a stochastic and multi-objective approach

2009· article· en· W2021391364 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPublic-Private Partnership Projects
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFlorida State UniversityU.S. Department of Transportation
KeywordsProfitability indexCreditorFinanceCapital structureBusinessEquity (law)Debt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Private financing has long been recognized as playing an important role in providing public infrastructure facilities worldwide. Private investors–operators, however, are often exposed to the financial risk of low profitability due to the inaccurate forecast of facility demand, operating income, and maintenance costs. From the operator’s perspective, a sound and thorough financial feasibility study is required to establish the appropriate capital structure of a project. To this end, operators are likely to reduce the equity amount to minimize the level of risk exposures, whereas creditors or lenders continue to raise it in an attempt to secure a decent level of financial responsibility from the operators. This paper presents an optimized capital structure model for both creditors and operators to reach an agreement for a balanced structure that synchronizes both profitability and repayment capacity. The model is developed with the use of Monte Carlo simulation and a multi-objective generic algorithm (GA) for drawing an optimal level of equity ratio. Results of a case study on a railway project show that the proposed model provides a proper range of capital structure for privately financed infrastructure projects while accounting for the project-specific risks under variable conditions.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.879

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.191 · 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