MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

CR-COPEC: Causal Rationale of Corporate Performance Changes to learn from Financial Reports

2023· article· en· W4389524264 on OpenAlexaff
Ye Chun, Sunjae Kwon, Kyunghwan Sohn, Nakwon Sung, Junyoup Lee, Kevin Compher, Seung-won Hwang, Jaesik Choi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersColorado Power Electronics Center, University of Colorado Boulder
KeywordsComputer scienceCausal analysisAdaptation (eye)SentenceAccountingScale (ratio)Affect (linguistics)BusinessArtificial intelligenceRisk analysis (engineering)Psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we introduce CR-COPEC called Causal Rationale of Corporate Performance Changes from financial reports. This is a comprehensive large-scale domain-adaptation causal sentence dataset to detect financial performance changes of corporate. CR-COPEC contributes to two major achievements. First, it detects causal rationale from 10-K annual reports of the U.S. companies, which contain experts’ causal analysis following accounting standards in a formal manner. This dataset can be widely used by both individual investors and analysts as material information resources for investing and decision-making without tremendous effort to read through all the documents. Second, it carefully considers different characteristics which affect the financial performance of companies in twelve industries. As a result, CR-COPEC can distinguish causal sentences in various industries by taking unique narratives in each industry into consideration. We also provide an extensive analysis of how well CR-COPEC dataset is constructed and suited for classifying target sentences as causal ones with respect to industry characteristics.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.242
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.150 · 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.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207