Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this article, we challenge the (implicit) dogmas of the current trend towards a business rescue culture within Europe. It is unclear why this trend – as a logical consequence of the desire to create increasingly debtor friendly insolvency regimes – keeps revealing and reinforcing itself in this time frame. Many different approaches take this concept for granted. The idea thus risks becoming an end in itself. The assumptions behind the current trend of business rescue culture should reflect the stylized facts of a firm embedded in its business ecology. An implicit dogma of current business rescue culture is that a firm is an entity that must survive and will create value indefinitely and, accordingly, deserves a second chance. However, the ability to create value and therefore the viability of a firm are the outcome of an uncertain economic process. Capitalism is a process of trial and error. Failure is a normal outcome and should be considered an essential part of capitalism. In general, the life span of firms is finite because they have to cope with many uncertainties and trade‐offs. The firm itself is only a tiny temporary (legal) shell within a self‐organized value chain that continuously reallocates resources as competition intensifies and the rate of innovation accelerates. The implicit assumptions or dogmas of the current business rescue culture contradict the accelerating destructive forces of capitalism and therefore can be labelled as an anachronism. Instead of focusing on the specific micro‐level of the firm, insolvency regimes should aim to provide a solution at the higher meso‐level. Copyright © 2018 The Authors International Insolvency Review published by INSOL International and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.061 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".