MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793544353 · doi:10.6000/1929-7092.2018.07.11

The Impact of Cash Flows and Weighted Average Cost of Capital to Enterprise Value in the Oil and Gas Sector

2018· article· en· W2793544353 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Павел Жуков

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reviews on Global Economics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCapital Investment and Risk Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValue (mathematics)Cash flowEconomicsCapital (architecture)BusinessMonetary economicsFossil fuelCashEconometricsFinancial economicsFinanceMathematicsStatisticsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates whether there is relationship between fluctuations of enterprise value or capitalization and related changes of WACC and cash flows. The study carried on the sample of some companies from the oil and gas sector, for the changes at intermediate term - from a quarter to three years. At the first stage the common model of discounting free cash flow on WACC was considered as the base model for research. The main conclusion was - intermediate term change s in the enterprise value are independent from changes of WACC. Dependence from changes in cash flows is either insignificant, except permanent growth rate for some growing companies. Finally it is concluded, that traditional WACC is not relevant discount rate for an assessment of enterprise value. At the second stage the alternative method for assessment of enterprise value was proposed, where cash flow is considered equal to expected value, which may grow with permanent growth rate. The method is based on stochastic cost of capital, similar to the generalized method of moments proposed by J. Cochrane, but different in conduction.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations21
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reviews on Global EconomicsSame topicCapital Investment and Risk AnalysisFrench-language works237,207