MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3169803295 · doi:10.5267/j.ac.2021.5.007

Dividend policy on regional development banks in Indonesia

2021· article· en· W3169803295 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Weni Susanti, Kamaludin Kamaludin, Rini Indriani, Fachruzzaman Fachruzzaman

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Analysis and Corporate Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDividendDividend payout ratioProfitability indexVariable (mathematics)Dividend policyVariablesSample (material)BusinessEconomicsFinancial systemMonetary economicsFinanceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to analyze the variable confirmation between the dividend payout ratio variable with the profitability variable and the lagged dividend variable by looking at the role of the share ownership variable as a dummy mediate variable. The research subject was carried out at the Regional Development Bank (BPD) in Indonesia. This study uses data and samples taken from data issued by the OJK (Financial Services Authority). Regional development banks were chosen because they have a different role in determining their dividend policy compared to other types of banks, but although this bank is different in its dividend distribution process, it is still capable of surviving even in times of crisis (Covid-19). By using OLS regression analysis, this study divides the research sample into a dummy group consisting of share ownership variables, these subsections are things that must be considered because they can be the key to why this type of bank is able to survive when other banks start to rush. goofy in giving dividends.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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