MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212161821 · doi:10.47153/afs14.2052021

Pengaruh Kurs terhadap Inflasi dan Harga Saham: Studi Kasus di Bank BTN

2021· article· en· W3212161821 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cahya Cahya

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting and Finance Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Analysis and Corporate Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock exchangeVariablesInflation (cosmology)Exchange rateEconomicsStock (firearms)EconometricsQuarter (Canadian coin)Inflation ratePopulationInterest rateMonetary economicsMathematicsStatisticsFinanceEngineeringGeographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to determine the effect of the exchange rate and inflation on the stock price of Bank BTN. This study uses quantitative methods. The population in this study is Bank BTN because this research is a case study. The choice of Bank BTN was due to the lack of research on exchange rates, inflation, and related stock prices. This study uses data from Bank BTN's financial statements obtained from the IDX.co.id page. This study uses the period from the third quarter of 2010 to the second quarter of 2020. This study uses linear regression analysis because it uses one independent variable and two dependent variables. The independent variable in this study is the exchange rate. The dependent variables in this study are inflation and stock prices. The results showed that the exchange rate had a significant positive effect on inflation and stock prices of Bank BTN. The results of this study can be used as a reference for making stock purchase decisions, especially at Bank BTN. An overview of further research is also presented here.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.225
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 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccounting and Finance StudiesSame topicFinancial Analysis and Corporate GovernanceFrench-language works237,207