MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166549016 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2013.02.015

A study on the relationship between capital structure and the performance of production market: A case study of firms listed on Tehran Stock Exchange

2013· article· en· W2166549016 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kobra Sadat Salek Esfahani, Mohammad Ali Ghasanfarymojarad

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapital structureStock exchangeBusinessDebt ratioPanel dataReturn on assetsRegression analysisOperating marginDebtSample (material)EconometricsMonetary economicsFinanceEconomicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most complicated and challenging issues in today's financial managers is the relationship between the components of capital structure in terms of bonds and shares used for financing and share price of their company, and its effects on the macroeconomic variables. This research aims to study the relationship between the capital structure and performance of the production market in some firms listed on Tehran Stock Exchange (TSE). In this research, the index of capital structure is debt ratio and that of production market performance is sales growth and return of assets (ROA). The statistical sample of this research includes 128 companies, which have been active in 11 various industries and listed on TSE over the period 2005-2010. The statistical techniques used to test the hypotheses of this research include correlation coefficient and pooled least squares regression (panel data). Based on the results of our survey, there is a strong and significant relationship between debt ratio and return on assets among the companies listed on TSE and most industries especially based metals at the confidence level of 95%. In contrast, there is no strong and significant relationship between debt ratio and sales growth in the above-mentioned companies and in most industries.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicCorporate Finance and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207