MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396892702 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17050205

Efficiency in Operations of NASDAQ Listed Technology Companies from 2011 to 2023

2024· article· en· W4396892702 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Suneel Maheshwari, Deepak Raghava Naik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessAccountingFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of technology companies listed on NASDAQ significantly impacts larger economic trends. Investors need specific information to navigate market volatility and make informed decisions in an increasingly complex marketplace. Furthermore, amidst the ongoing digital revolution, legislators and regulatory agencies must comprehend the operational dynamics of technology companies to develop frameworks that support innovation while maintaining market stability. Our study assesses the impact on the overall operational efficiency of NASDAQ-listed firms from 2011 to 2023, resulting from the interdependence of critical variables such as selling, general, and administrative expenses (SGA), cost of goods and services sold (COGS), and investments in research and development (R&D). Johansen’s cointegration methodology and pairwise Granger causality tests were employed to unveil long-term relationships, equilibrium adjustments, and causal relationships among the considered variables. The results provide critical insights into the strategic management of operational variables by the listed companies. The economic significance of the results obtained underscores the paramount importance of efficiently managing the cost of goods and services sold to achieve superior operating performance among these leading technology firms.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial management→Same topicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance→French-language works237,207→