MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3172678159 · doi:10.5267/j.ac.2021.2.016

The empirical evidence of the effect of company size, leverage and profitability on income smoothing

2021· article· en· W3172678159 on OpenAlex
Dini Rosdini, Aria Farah Mita, Dyah Ayu Woro Setyaningrum

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Governance and Financial Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfitability indexSmoothingStock exchangeLeverage (statistics)Nonprobability samplingEconometricsStock (firearms)BusinessIndex (typography)EconomicsStatisticsFinanceMathematicsEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Income smoothing is basically a management strategy to reduce fluctuating income levels. This study aims to determine the effect of company size, leverage and profitability on income smoothing in companies listed on the LQ45 Index of the Indonesia Stock Exchange for the 2017-2019 period. It was carried out on companies listed on the LQ45 Index of the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2017-2019. Sampling was conducted by utilizing purposive sampling and obtained 11 companies, from which 33 data were collected. The analysis technique used was multiple linear regression analysis. Results showed that company size, leverage and profitability simultaneously can affect income smoothing of a company. Company size and profitability partially have a positive effect on income smoothing, while leverage has a negative effect on income smoothing.

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.

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)0.003
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.216 · 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