The Mediating Effect of Intellectual Capital Disclosure Between Firm Characteristics and Firm Value: Empirical Evidence From Indonesian Company With Non-recursive Model Analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on the signaling theory, this study seeks to explain the interaction of corporate value and the disclosure of intellectual capital in a framework of analysis of recursive models. Testing the recursive model also involves firm size and company growth as a characteristic of the company to clarify the mediating role of intellectual capital in mediating both of the firm's values. We find a positive relationship between firm size and growth on intellectual capital disclosure. The greater the size and growth of the company, the more it encourages companies to disclose intellectual capital in the company's annual report. Also, we find a non-recursive model between intellectual capital disclosure and firm value. This shows that the broader the disclosure of IC information by the company, the better the investor's perception of the company is reflected in the value of the company. Meanwhile, at different times the current condition of the company's value will encourage companies to disclose more complete IC information.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it