Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study examines the relationship between oil price uncertainty (OPU) and corporate inventory investments using a sample of 6,072 USA manufacturing firms from 1992 to 2019. Design/methodology/approach The author's study employs a panel dataset to examine the relationship between OPU and corporate inventory investments. The author uses several alternative specifications such as fixed effects models, an instrumental variable analysis, an impact threshold for confounding variable (ITCV) analysis, alternative measures, additional control variables and the percent bias analysis to account for endogeneity issues. Findings Corporate inventory investments decrease in response to high OPU. This decrease in inventory investments happens regardless of firms' expected stockout costs, information environment and reliance on external financing. As a potential mechanism, an uncertainty-induced increase in cash holdings contributes to this reduction in inventory investments. Also, the effect of OPU is non-linear and asymmetric. In response to the volatility of positive (negative) oil price changes, inventory investments decrease (increase) up to a certain point and increase (decrease) after that. Further, uncertainty-induced adjustments in inventory investments positively influence the operating performance of firms. Originality/value The author's study adds to the growing literature that examines the impact of OPU on corporate outcomes. Inventory investments directly affect business operations and could better reflect firms' responses to an uncertain environment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".