Big data analytics techniques and their impacts on reducing information asymmetry: Evidence from Jordan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to demonstrate the impact of big data analytics techniques on reducing information asymmetry in industrial companies listed on the Amman Stock Exchange from the point of view of workers in Jordanian financial intermediation companies. Two approaches have been adopted to achieve the target of this research. The first approach is the analytical descriptive approach through a survey to collect primary data that measures the elements of the independent variable related to big data analytics techniques (Volume, Velocity, Variety, and Veracity). The second approach is an applied approach that measures the dependent variable of information asymmetry based on the financial statements of industrial companies listed on Amman Stock Exchange for the period (2015-2021). The statistical program (SPSS) has been used to analyze data and test the hypotheses through multiple regression testing. Based on the results of the statistical analysis of the data and the opinions of the research community, it was found that the huge volume of big data has become difficult to process using traditional data processing applications. Furthermore, there is a statistically significant relationship between big data analytics techniques and the reduction of information asymmetry from the point of view of employees in intermediation firms in Jordan. Consequently, it is necessary for those in charge of the industrial companies listed on the Amman Stock Exchange to develop modern techniques capable of analyzing big data with high efficiency. It can also assist in providing target groups including investors, stakeholders, and other beneficiaries with reliable and efficient data required to make rational decisions, as well as to reduce the risks of information asymmetry.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".