Corporate Finance Practices in Canada: Where Do We Stand?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates the financial practices of Canadian firms involving capital budgeting, cost of capital estimation, capital structure, and real options. Survey respondents express a strong preference for net present value followed by internal rate of return and payback methods. The least popular capital budgeting technique is real options. Unlike their U.S. and European counterparts, Canadian firms rely more on subjective risk assessments in adjusting their discount rate. The use of subjective judgment by Canadian managers also applies to risk analysis, forecasting project cash flows, and estimating the cost of equity capital. This finding differs markedly from the widespread use of the capital asset pricing model by U.S. and European firms. In examining capital structure choice, the results show support for trade-off theory relative to pecking order theory. Finally, firm size and the education of the chief executive officer influence corporate finance decisions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it