MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2616437521 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v9n6p69

Firm Value and External Financing Needs

2017· article· en· W2616437521 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aykut Karakaya, Ayten Turan Kurtaran, Ahmet Kurtaran

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPanel dataLeverage (statistics)Profitability indexBusinessStock exchangeFinanceIndex (typography)Enterprise valueMarket valueExternal financingDebtValue (mathematics)Monetary economicsEconomicsEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to examine effects on firm value of external financing needs and BIST 100 index to firms listed in the index of Istanbul Stock Exchange manufacturing industry by the panel data analysis methods in the period of 2008-2012. As a result of dynamic panel data analysis, it has be found to increase value of firms by previous term value of firm, being the BIST 100 index, the external financing needs, the financial leverage ratio, firm size and profitability. It was observed that manufacturing firms in Turkey are firms having growth potential, profitable at low rate, whereas financial risk of them is high.It has been found that firms benefit from shorts term debt market being lower borrowing cost and risk because long term debt market hasn’t developed in Turkey leads to positive relationship between external financing needs and firm value. Additionally, It is determined that value of firms included in the index is higher from without because firms are necessary providing certain conditions to take part in the BIST 100.

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)0.007
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicCorporate Finance and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207