MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124434607 · doi:10.1111/jbfa.12416

Selective disclosure and the role of Form 8‐K in the post‐Reg FD era

2019· article· en· W3124434607 on OpenAlexaff
Cristi A. Gleason, Zhejia Ling, Rong Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Business Finance &amp Accounting · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrivate information retrievalBusinessAccountingInvestment (military)Actuarial sciencePolitical scienceLawComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We investigate the impact of Form 8‐K filings on cross‐firm differences in analysts’ private or idiosyncratic information in the post‐Reg FD era. Using firms’ connections to the investment community to identify the likelihood of selective disclosure, we document differences in analysts’ idiosyncratic information arising from selective disclosure before 8‐K filings. While filings of 8‐Ks pursuant to Reg FD attenuate the link between connections and analysts’ idiosyncratic information, they do so only after selective disclosures have already resulted in some analysts having better private information. In addition, the connections continue to facilitate private information search after the filings of non‐Reg FD‐specific 8‐Ks.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Business Finance &amp AccountingSame topicCorporate Finance and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207