MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037572673 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v2n1p186

Cost and Profit Efficiency of the Malaysian Commercial Banks: A Comparison between Domestic and Foreign Banks

2010· article· en· W2037572673 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

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEfficiency Analysis Using DEA
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfit (economics)FrontierProfit marginStochastic frontier analysisCost efficiencyMonetary economicsGross profitBusinessEconomicsMargin (machine learning)FinanceMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the relative efficiency levels of domestic and foreign commercial banks in Malaysia between 2000 and 2006, using accounting-based ratio, stochastic cost and profit frontier approach. Using accounting-based ratio, the results suggest that interest margin and operating cost are slightly higher for domestic banks than for foreign banks. Further, the results also suggest that profit ratios are slightly higher for foreign banks relative to domestic banks. Using the stochastic frontier approach, the results indicate that domestic banks are found to be more cost-efficient but less profit - efficient relative to foreign banks. Keywords: Efficiency, accounting-based ratios, stochastic cost and profit frontier approach, Malaysia

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.297 · 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