MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058267792 · doi:10.1504/ijebr.2012.049533

Active cost management in Argentinean banks: an empirical test of sticky costs

2012· article· en· W2058267792 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Business Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness, Education, Mathematics Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLatin AmericansEconomicsEmerging marketsEmpirical researchFinancial sectorEconomyNoveltyMonetary economicsMacroeconomicsFinancePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study provides a test and analyses the existence and magnitude of sticky costs in an emerging economy’s financial sector. The results use data from Argentinean banks between 2005 and 2010 (total costs increase 0.55% for every 1% total income increase and decrease only 0.13% per 1% total income decrease) and show that the sticky cost magnitude is similar but more pronounced than those documented in previous studies, both in central economies (Anderson et al., 2003; Calleja et al., 2006) and in emerging economies (Ribeiro de Medeiros and de Souza Costa, 2004). This kind of analysis’ absence from Latin-American companies’ financial sectors, particularly those in Argentina, is one of the main characteristics of this study. Its main contribution to the literature is the topic’s novelty and its empirical validation in a G-20 emerging economy’s financial sector.

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)0.001
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 score0.518

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.271 · 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