MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3119595994 · doi:10.5267/j.ac.2021.1.003

Timeliness of corporate annual financial reporting in Indonesian banking industry

2021· article· en· W3119595994 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wahyu Murti

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Analysis and Corporate Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTimelineBusinessFinancial systemMarket liquidityFinanceEquity (law)Debt-to-equity ratioFinancial ratioEquity ratioCapital adequacy ratioDebt ratioDebtAccountingEquity capital marketsEconomicsPrivate equity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The financial performance of the banking sector globally can be seen on the capital markets of each country. One of the important sources of information in the investment business on the capital market is the financial reports that are provided by every company going public. The objectives of this study are (1) to determine the simultaneous and partial effect of liquidity factors, Debt Equity Ratio, company size on timeliness of financial reporting in the banking sector in Indonesia. (2) to determine what factors are dominant in the timeliness of financial reporting in the banking sector in Indonesia. This research uses secondary data with panel data analysis method. The results show the liquidity variable, Debt Equity Ratio and firm size positively influence on timeliness of financial reporting in the banking sector in Indonesia. Firm Size is the dominant factor that has a significant positive effect on the Timelines Financial Report of the banking sector in Indonesia. The findings of this research are that increasing liquidity, Debt Equity Ratio and Firm Size can increase the Timelines Financial Report of the banking sector in Indonesia. Firm Size as the dominant factor is the attraction and driving force for the Timelines Financial Report banking sector in Indonesia. The research can be used as a reference for future researchers on identifying efforts of the influence of Liquidity, Debt to Equity Ratio, Firm Size and Timelines Report.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccountingSame topicFinancial Analysis and Corporate GovernanceFrench-language works237,207