MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W33124982 · doi:10.7554/elife.60751

AGENCY COST TO DIVIDEND PAYOUT RATIOAGENCY COST TERHADAP DIVIDEND PAYOUT RATIO

2011· article· en· W33124982 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nur Imam Arifanto, Prasetiono Prasetiono

Bibliographic record

VenueeLife · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Analysis and Corporate Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institute of General Medical SciencesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsDividend payout ratioAgency costInsiderBusinessDividendAgency (philosophy)Actuarial scienceDividend policyAccountingEconometricsFinanceEconomicsCorporate governanceShareholder

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was conducted to examine the effect of agency cost in dividend policy (dividend payout . In this case, the agency cost is represented by insider ownership, institutional ownership, collateralizable &bt to tatal assets, and.frim size. Basically, the purpose of this study is to know how big the infiuence cost of dividen policy (dividend payout ratio). The samples in this study used purposive sampling ofNon-Financial Companies which arelisted on thelndonesianStock Exchangewithin 2005- The analytical tool that used in this study were multiple regressions. From the analysis shows that in institutional ownership variables andfirm size variables are influence positively and signifrcantly on trn- This research also.found that collateralizable assets has negative and significant influence on DPR. The * variables in the research which are insider ownership and debt to total assets did not affect significantly t DPR. The result of regression estimation show the ability of model prediction is 45%while the remaining 5f '. influenced by other.factors outside the model that has not been included in the study

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.008

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.170 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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