MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2803435750 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v10n6p174

Collusive Stability and Corporate Governance: The Case of UK Firms

2018· article· en· W2803435750 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Suha Mahmoud Alawi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceBusinessAccountingDescriptive statisticsCollusionStability (learning theory)Goods and servicesIndustrial organizationEconomicsFinanceMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UK firms have been involved in the price fixing crime that results into increased, decreased or even stabilization of the goods and services prices. The study aims to investigate the collusive behavior that is achieved on the basis of dynamics and stability of corporate governance among UK firms. A total of 150 firms have been included in the study. The study has collected information from multiple databases such as BoardsEx, ExecuComp, UK Companies House, Annual Reports and DataStream. It is associated with different databases that include board characteristics, CEO characteristics, and ownership structure between the collusive and non-collusive firms. A significant positive association has been observed between collusive behavior and qualities of corporate governance. Results have been represented as two tailed, showing different observations with their respective means and standard deviation. The study has provided brief summary of descriptive statistics, associated with the collusive behavior of collusive and non-collusive firms, in relation to the ownership structure, board characteristics, and CEO characteristics.

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)0.006
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 score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.216
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance→Same topicCorporate Finance and Governance→French-language works237,207→