MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390430901 · doi:10.1111/jbfa.12779

Does good news cover bad news?

2023· article· en· W4390430901 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qingbin Meng, Shaojing Ke, Daxuan Zhao, Yongqiang Chu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Business Finance &amp Accounting · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)EarningsCover (algebra)Stock (firearms)Annual reportBusinessFiscal yearStock marketCover storyEconomicsAccountingMonetary economicsFinanceGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Does good news cover bad news? We present evidence from the Chinese stock market, in which the fiscal year is always the same as the calendar year. Listed firms are required to announce their annual report by the end of April, coinciding with the deadline for the release of their first‐quarter reports. We find that firms with negative earnings surprises in the previous year are more likely to postpone the announcement of their annual report until they announce their first‐quarter report. However, we find no evidence to suggest that this bundling disclosure weakens market responses to information in annual reports.

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)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, 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 score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Business Finance &amp AccountingSame topicAuditing, Earnings Management, GovernanceFrench-language works237,207