MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319006509 · doi:10.3390/jrfm16020088

A New Multi-Dimensional Framework for Start-Ups Lifespan Assessment Using Bayesian Networks

2023· article· en· W4319006509 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammadreza Valaei, Vahid Khodakarami

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy Prediction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIran National Science FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceExplanatory powerBayesian networkMachine learningArtificial intelligenceExpert opinionBayesian probabilityFeature (linguistics)Rank (graph theory)Receiver operating characteristicData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As historical data are typically unavailable for a start-up, risk assessment is always complex and challenging. Traditional methods are incapable of capturing all facets of this complexity; therefore, more sophisticated tools are necessary. Using an expert-elicited Bayesian networks (BNs) methodology, this paper aims to provide a method for combining diverse sources of information, such as historical data, expert knowledge, and the unique characteristics of each start-up, to estimate the default rate at various stages of the life cycle. The proposed method not only reduces the cognitive error of expert opinion for a new start-up but also considers the learning feature of BNs and the effect of lifespan when updating default estimations. In addition, the model considers the impact of investors’ risk appetite. Furthermore, the model can rank the most effective risk factors at various stages. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was utilized to assess the model’s explanatory power. Moreover, three distinct case studies were used to demonstrate the model’s capabilities.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.765

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy PredictionFrench-language works237,207