MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2339085787 · doi:10.5267/j.ac.2016.3.003

Investigating the relationship between financial distress and investment efficiency of companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange

2016· article· en· W2339085787 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mehdi Vosoughi, Hojat Derakhshan, Mohammad Alipour

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInsurance and Financial Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock exchangeFinancial distressBusinessStock (firearms)FinanceFinancial systemGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study is aimed at investigating the relationship between financial distress and investment efficiency of companies listed in the Tehran Stock Exchange (with emphasis on the role of ownership type). To calculate investment efficiency, the Richardson's model Over-investment of free cash flow. Review of Accounting Studies, was employed. The aim of the present study is applied and its method is correlational-ex post facto. Using the exclusion sampling method and by applying the conditions of selecting the sample, 94 companies were selected from 2008 to 2013. To test the research hypotheses, multiple regression was used. Findings of the research indicate that there was a correlation between financial distress and investment efficiency in companies listed in the Tehran Stock Exchange, and institutional ownership had positive effects on the relationship between financial distress and investment efficiency of companies listed in the Tehran Stock Exchange. Furthermore, management ownership had no effect on the relationship between financial distress and investment efficiency in companies listed in the Tehran Stock Exchange.

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)0.001
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 score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccountingSame topicInsurance and Financial Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207