MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885651409 · doi:10.22495/cocv15i4art10

Securities class actions of Chinese companies

2018· article· en· W2885651409 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nancy Chun Feng, Ross D. Fuerman

Bibliographic record

VenueCorporate Ownership and Control · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClass actionBusinessAccountingEnforcementSettlement (finance)AuditQuality auditContext (archaeology)BankruptcySecurities fraudChinaAuditor independenceFinancePaymentJoint auditInternal auditLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides the first empirical evidence documenting the determinants and outcomes of private securities class action lawsuits filed in the US and Canada against Chinese companies and their auditors. Our findings show that, in the global context, Chinese companies are positively associated with their auditors being defendants and experiencing an adverse outcome (for example, related government enforcement actions and/or settlement payments to terminate class actions). A group of companies from outside the US with low country level audit quality, the Chinese companies, and the overall global sample were compared. For the low country level audit quality comparison group, we found that a restatement was negatively associated with auditors being defendants; this is a new finding. Two unique Chinese characteristics are that reverse mergers are positively associated with auditor litigation and bankruptcy has no association with auditor litigation. Aggregate Chinese companies’ settlements are positively associated with the occurrence of an auditor settlement and with class period length. Auditor settlements are associated with several factors. No mainland China CPA firm has ever paid to settle a private securities class action filed in the US or Canada; this also is a new finding. Several factors explain this last result.

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)0.003
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 score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 venueCorporate Ownership and ControlSame topicAuditing, Earnings Management, GovernanceFrench-language works237,207