MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037998622 · doi:10.1002/cjas.62

Estimation of the default risk of publicly traded companies: evidence from Canadian data

2008· article· en· W2037998622 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Georges Dionne, Sadok Laajimi, Sofiane Mejri, Madalina Petrescu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l Administration · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCredit Risk and Financial Regulations
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconometricsDefault riskRisk modelValue (mathematics)Actuarial scienceMaximum likelihoodEconomicsBusinessAccountingFinancial economicsStatisticsCredit riskMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Through Canadian publicly traded companies, this study assessed how combining firms' continuous valuations by the market (structural model) with the value given in their financial statements (accounting model) could enhance prediction of a company's probability of default. The hybrid model outperformed other models. Specifically, estimated structural probabilities of default (PDs) contributed significantly to predicting default probabilities when they were included alongside accounting and macroeconomic variables in our hybrid model. These results were obtained with two versions of the structural model: the Merton model (Merton, 1973, 1974) and the default barrier model (Brockman & Turtle, 2003). Both models were estimated with the maximum likelihood method. Copyright © 2008 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.249
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.066 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l AdministrationSame topicCredit Risk and Financial RegulationsFrench-language works237,207