MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326332997 · doi:10.5267/j.ac.2016.3.001

The effect of acquisitions on firm performance: Evidence Tehran Stock Exchange

2016· article· en· W2326332997 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Farhad Hanifi, Shahram Vahedi

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock exchangeBusinessStock (firearms)Monetary economicsEconomicsFinanceMaterials scienceMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, mergers and acquisitions are stated as favorable strategies and as free flows of capital applied by managers for the optimal implementation of resources and assets.Acquisition is associated with a condition where two businesses are placed under one shelter and are run like members of a group or are merged as a single corporate.In mergers, two businesses are combined in a new form based on the mutual interests of both parties.The shares of the two businesses are usually exchanged so that they could take part in the new business as shareholders.In acquisition, a business begins to control another business effectively by purchasing parts of its ownership.The present study explored the impact of acquisition on performance of Iranian target companies listed in Tehran Stock Exchange.The results of testing research hypotheses showed that performance of target companies did not significantly increase after acquisition, suggesting a decreasing trend in the performance of the target companies after acquisition compared with the period before acquisition.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccountingSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207