MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391262151 · doi:10.54097/jj4cj015

Stock Value Analysis Based on the DDM Model: An Example of Company COSCO

2024· article· en· W4391262151 on OpenAlex
Fengyuan Tian

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHighlights in Business Economics and Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock (firearms)Stock marketComputer scienceEconometricsOperations researchFinancial economicsEconomicsBusinessMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The stock market is unpredictable and there are many ways and means to analyze stocks, DDM is still worth to be analyzed and discussed as one of the less common but very basic and important analytical means. This paper, will focus on GGM in DDM and apply it to COSCO Shipping Holding to find out whether DDM is applicable to this stock and whether this stock is worth investing in. In this paper, it obtains the relevant data from the company's annual report as well as the financial data website, calculate and derive the final estimate by using the DDM formula. The estimated value will be compared with the actual value to determine whether the stock is worth investing in or not. In the end, the estimated value calculated by DDM is much larger than the actual stock price, which means that the stock is seriously undervalued and may bring great returns according to the principle of DDM. Combining the actual situation and objective factors, this paper concludes that the principle and formula of DDM are very important, but it is not applicable to all situations. The necessary conditions are more demanding, and they need to be combined with many other theories to analyze many aspects.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.204 · 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