Do Portuguese private firms follow pecking order financing?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper tests for pecking order behavior in medium-sized private Portuguese firms. In contrast to the usual split between internal funds, debt, and external equity, we separate debt into four components – cheap trade credits (CTC), bank loans (BL), other loans, and expensive credits (EC). We use breakpoint tests to identify when firms switch between funding sources by examining the change in each funding source based on the financing deficit remaining after the previous pecking order funding source has been used. Our tests indicate that Portuguese companies generally move from lower cost to higher cost financing sources, but they do not exhaust each type of debt before moving on to the next funding source in the pecking order. Such behavior is consistent with a loose interpretation of pecking order financing, but not a strict interpretation of the theory. Instead, Portuguese firms may be balancing pecking order financing with a need to maintain some degree of financing 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it