Determinants of information disclosure by companies listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange in Poland
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
The paper aims to identify the determinants of information disclosure in financial reports of 227 public companies listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange in Poland in the years 2010-2013. Understanding what influences the scope of disclosure by listed companies is important in the context of minimising information asymmetry on the capital markets and reporting standards harmonisation. I conducted a panel study with the self calculated CIFAR Index and its part concerning the disclosure of information to shareholders and the accounting policy. The findings confirmed that larger companies disclose more information in their financial reports and on the website. Audit conducted by a firm from the 'big four' is positively, while free float negatively, correlated with information disclosure to stockholders. The extent of disclosure increases with external financing. However, applying for a bank loan reduces the disclosure to shareholders, while increases disclosures in total and in scope of the accounting policy.
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) | 0.000 | 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