MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3194330189 · doi:10.5430/afr.v10n3p72

Financial Situation Unique Indicator for Electric Sector Firms

2021· article· en· W3194330189 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aracéli Cristina de Sousa Ferreira, Vinícius Mothé Maia, Dilo S. de Carvalho Vianna, Juliana Molina Queiroz

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting and Finance Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEfficiency Analysis Using DEA
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfitability indexInvestment (military)SolvencyDimension (graph theory)EconomicsVariablesElectric utilityActuarial scienceEconometricsBusinessFinanceEngineeringMarket liquidityStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper develops a unique indicator to identify the financial situation of firms in the electric sector in Brazil. The National Electric Energy Agency (ANEEL) regulates this sector through five dimensions: indebtedness, efficiency, investment, profitability, and pay-out ratio. Each of these dimensions contains one or two indicators. Based on these indicators, we develop a unique indicator that shows companies' financial situation. To create a unique indicator, we follow the idea of Altman’s solvency indicator. But, we use a logit regression. Our dependent variable is Global Performance of Continuity which indicates the financial situation of the firm. Our independent variables are based on the five dimensions of the ANEEL indicators for financial situation. We collect data from 2011 to 2018. This research follows three main steps: (1) Collection of the data from the ANEEL database; (2) Creation of variables based on ANEEL’s five dimensions of performance; and (3) Econometric proceedings with variables according to ANEEL’s data and indicators of each dimension. First, we estimate one regression with all variables created based on ANEEL’s five dimensions. Then, we make improvements to find a more suitable model with different combinations of variables. We chose the best model by analysing the Akaike information criterion (AIC). Our results show that the unique indicator we create to evaluate firm performance is based on Debt, Efficiency, Investment (CapexA) and the Pay-out Ratio.

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)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 venueAccounting and Finance ResearchSame topicEfficiency Analysis Using DEAFrench-language works237,207