MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163316400 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v5n8p94

Profitability in Swedish Micro Firms: A Quantile Regression Approach

2012· article· en· W2163316400 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aneel Salman, Darush Yazdanfar

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFirm Innovation and Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfitability indexOrdinary least squaresQuantile regressionEconometricsProductivityEconomicsAsset (computer security)Regression analysisBusinessIndustrial organizationMicroeconomicsStatisticsMathematicsFinanceMacroeconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to identify a function for the profitability of Swedish micro firms in the sectors of health, transport, trade and metal. In order to understand how micro firms relate to key variables, such as firm size, growth of sales, productivities, lagged profits, asset turnover and firm’s age, OLS (Ordinary Least Squares), and the more robust quantile regression techniques, are used to estimate micro-firm profitability. Data from 2007 is used for this purpose. The results show that growth (competitive condition) and total factor productivity (comparative advantage) have a significant positive effect on micro-firm profitability, and that size (diminishing returns states) is found to have a rather significant negative effect on micro-firm profitability. The results also indicate a strong relationship between microeconomic theory suggestions and micro-firm profitability for the all micro firms except those in the metal sector. Moreover, the quantile regression approach provided a better understanding, regarding the dynamics of the factors that affect profitability, and provided more interesting results than OLS normally do.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.153
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations51
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicFirm Innovation and GrowthFrench-language works237,207