MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387056144 · doi:10.1002/iir.1517

A critical analysis of India's pre‐pack regime for <scp>MSMEs</scp>

2023· article· en· W4387056144 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Urmika Tripathi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Insolvency Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Insolvency and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRestructuringInsolvencyDebtorBankruptcyBusinessPopularityCreditorPolitical scienceFinanceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Hybrid restructuring procedures, such as pre‐packs, have been encouraged to deal with an expected increase in insolvent firms in the aftermath of the COVID‐19 pandemic. Pre‐packs have been gaining popularity as a restructuring mechanism across the world. India too introduced a pre‐packaged insolvency resolution process for micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) in April 2021. This article first provides a brief overview of the pre‐pack models employed in certain other jurisdictions such as the United States of America, United Kingdom and Singapore with a view to understanding the key features of pre‐pack models and how they have been operationalised in these jurisdictions. It then briefly discusses other restructuring avenues, that were available to a corporate debtor in India, and the circumstances that led up to the introduction of pre‐packs in India. Finally, it provides a detailed overview of the Indian pre‐pack regime and evaluates its effectiveness for MSMEs, potential issues that may cause delays in the process and how the current pre‐pack regime can be further streamlined. It argues that some of the procedural requirements and features of the Indian pre‐pack regime may not be suitable for MSME insolvencies.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Insolvency ReviewSame topicCorporate Insolvency and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207