MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3166536302 · doi:10.24014/ijaidm.v4i1.11303

Clustering analysis of financial distress on tourism sector companies go-public due to lSSR

2021· article· en· W3166536302 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ahmad Maulana, Camelia Iltazami Ulva, Fath Esa Prasanti Kusuma, Faza Budiarti, Moh. Fadli Hidayat Dj Makaraseng, Nyoman Putri Pradievy Syanthi, Rani Nooraeni

Bibliographic record

VenueIndonesian Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Data Mining · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy Prediction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)BusinessTourismBankruptcyFinanceEquity ratioFinancial ratioDebt ratioProductivityEquity (law)Return on equityAsset (computer security)DebtDebt-to-equity ratioCurrent ratioEconomicsProfitability index

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large-Scale Social Restriction Policy (LSSR) to prevent the spread of COVID-19 has a big impact on economic activities, one of which is activities in the tourism sector. Restrictions on outdoor activities reduce the productivity of companies that can lead to bankruptcy. By knowing the financial condition of the company, we can predict whether the company will experience financial pressures or not. This paper tries to analyze the grouping of 100 companies in the tourism sector before (the first quarter of 2020) and after (the second quarter of 2020) the application of LSSR conditions. This paper uses the K-Means grouping method and the financial ratio of each company. Then, the variables in the analysis are Return on Asset (ROA), Total Asset Turn Over Ratio (TATO), Debt to Equity Ratio (DER), and Price to Earning Ratio (PER). The results showed that in the second quarter of 2020 or after the implementation of LSSR, almost all companies tend to be in a financially depressed condition. The number of companies that are under financial pressure after the implementation of this policy is 98 companies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndonesian Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Data MiningSame topicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy PredictionFrench-language works237,207