Comparing the role of accruals and operating cash flows on users' decisions on financial statements: A case study of Tehran Stock Exchange
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the major challenges facing all of individuals and organizations is decision-making based on the information. The issues of priority about cash flows and accruals data in decisionmaking process for different groups of financial statement users include investors, creditors, shareholders, directors, etc. one of the issues that has been controversial between accrual and cash accounting advocators for a long time. In this study, we survey the role of accruals and operating cash flows in decisions of financial statement users in listed companies on Tehran stock exchange, information content of operating cash flows and accruals in the connection with decision-making criteria used by different groups using financial statement has been examined. In this study, we use eliminating sampling and implied limitations and the sample size includes 203 companies to examine six hypotheses. The results of this research indicate that there is a significant different between accruals and operating cash flows information content in relation to various decision-making criteria but utilizing accruals and operating cash flows supplementary and simultaneously in profit frame depending on the selection criteria may or may not be include information value-added.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".