MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Value‐relevance of Earnings and Book Value, Ownership Structure, and Business Group Affiliation: Evidence From Korean Business Groups

2007· article· en· W2037352137 on OpenAlex
Kee‐Hong Bae, Seok Woo Jeong

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

VenueJournal of Business Finance &amp Accounting · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChaebolAccountingBusinessCorporate governanceEarningsProxy (statistics)Equity valueEnterprise valueEquity (law)Earnings qualityRelevance (law)Value (mathematics)Shareholder valueBook valueBusiness valueCorporate groupShareholderEconomicsFinanceProfit (economics)MicroeconomicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: We investigate the quality of two primary accounting summary measures, i.e., earnings and book value, provided by firms belonging to Korean business groups (chaebols). We find that the value‐relevance of earnings and book value is significantly smaller for firms affiliated with business groups. We also find that cross‐equity ownership (a proxy for the agency problem between controlling and minority shareholders) negatively affects value‐relevance, while foreign equity ownership (a proxy for the monitoring effect) positively affects value‐relevance. This evidence is consistent with the view that the poor quality of earnings and book value provided by chaebol‐affiliated firms is due to the inherently poor governance structure of chaebols.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.007
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.206 · 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