Likelihood of financial distress in Canadian oil and gas market: An optimized hybrid forecasting approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forecasting models are built on either multivariate parametric or nonparametric methodologies. We attempt to optimize the accuracy of the forecasts combining these approaches to make a robust hybrid forecasting model in predicting the likelihood of financial distress for companies in the Canadian oil and gas market. The proposed approach combined the forecasts out of a multivariate logit model based on the conventional Altman’s Z-score with a nonparametric Artificial Neural Network (ANN) technique. The sample firms are publicly traded and listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) and span over a period from first quarter of 1999 to the last quarter of 2014. The results of a proposed three-stage estimation process for the period of 2015-2020 indicated that besides the fact that Canadian energy sector will go through ups and downs regarding the likelihood of financial distress, this industry would face a hard time by late 2020. Results show that the forecasting accuracy out of the proposed three-stage forecasting technique is significantly superior to the outcomes of any individual forecasting techniques, i.e. ANN and logit models.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".