MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3154805534 · doi:10.5267/j.ac.2021.3.013

Critical risk factors of the project finance loan spread in the infrastructure sector: Experience from the ASEAN countries

2021· article· en· W3154805534 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elvi Nasution, Sugiarto Sugiarto, Gracia Shinta S, Ugut Ugut, Edison Hulu

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPublic-Private Partnership Projects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProject financeLoanBridge loanFinanceLiborNon-performing loanBusinessTrade financeAccess to financeParticipation loanEconomicsFinancial systemPublic financeInterest rateMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper finds that in ASEAN-4, the micro loan characteristics: loan amount and LIBOR whilst the macro characteristics: inflation, net export and GDP growth influence the loan spread in the project finance. However, simultaneously at the country level, the determinants of the loan spread are distinctive to each country’s infrastructure industry characteristic. The paper’s main contribution relates to the determinants of the project finance loan spread at the country level and regional level, ASEAN-4. The purpose of this paper is to fathom the critical risk factors behind the project finance loan pricing differential across the ASEAN-4 countries. Hence, the policy makers, project developers and lenders can have a better understanding of the drivers behind the project finance loan spread pricing. The study adopted an ordinary least square (OLS) regression methodology and collected data from ASEAN-4 countries consisting of Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, and Thailand.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccountingSame topicPublic-Private Partnership ProjectsFrench-language works237,207