MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Biggest Public Oil Companies: Impact of External and Internal Factors on Capitalization

2019· article· en· W2981857597 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Рустем Махмутович Нуреев, Evgeny Busygin

Bibliographic record

VenueFinance Theory and Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUpstream (networking)Downstream (manufacturing)BusinessProfitability indexCapitalizationProduction (economics)Market capitalizationShareholderFinancePetroleum industryQuarter (Canadian coin)Initial public offeringMonetary economicsIndustrial organizationEconomicsStock marketCorporate governanceEnvironmental scienceMarketingMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Estimate and search for factors that influence the capitalization of public oil companies are of great interest to researchers. The impact of various external and internal factors on the value of oil companies’ stocks was considered. This includes changes in oil prices, stock market index movements, inflation fluctuations, financial and production indicators. The study includes building models with calculated standard errors by the Driscoll-Kraay method based on quarterly data for the eight biggest public oil companies operating in the upstream and downstream segments, from the first quarter of 2006 to the third quarter of 2017. Such indicators as total oil production by OPEC countries, greenhouse gas emissions by companies, and the sum of shareholder’s funds owned by large institutional investors were used for the first time when building the model to identify factors affecting the market capitalization of oil companies. One of the key results is the conclusion that quarterly production volumes turned out to be the most significant factor having a positive impact on the cost of oil firms. That is, investors are laying the idea of compensating for losses from lowering the cost of oil by increasing its production and selling a larger volume in the value of shares in companies. At the same time, such indicators of production efficiency as profitability in the upstream and downstream segments lose their significance depending on the period under consideration.

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)0.005
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFinance Theory and PracticeSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207