Comprehensive Evaluation Model Construction of Multidimensional Financial Indicators Based on Entropy Weight Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rapid development of the economy in recent years has brought convenience to enterprises, but also made the competition between enterprises more intense, enterprises want to stand firm in the fierce competition not only to improve financial performance, but also from a multi-dimensional integrated perspective.For this reason, this paper launched a multidimensional financial comprehensive evaluation research for enterprises.Based on the Harvard analytical framework, the study firstly emphasizes the financial performance of enterprises and at the same time combines the social responsibility perspective to screen the indicators.Then the quantitative evaluation method of this paper is proposed, i.e. the entropy weight method and gray correlation method are combined to analyze the development status of multidimensional financial performance from an objective point of view.Then the entropy weight method and gray correlation method model are introduced respectively, and the modeling method of combining the two applied in this paper is explained.Finally, by analyzing and evaluating the results of the sample company M, it can be obtained that (1) the results of the correlation degree of company M from 2017 to 2022 are 0.722, 0.473, 0.398, 0.389, 0.426, and 0.496 respectively, and the results of the multidimensional financial synthesis evaluation of company M during these six years are optimal in 2017.(2) The overall performance of the financial capital status of Company M from 2017 to 2022 is gradually deteriorating.(3) Overall, the performance of Company M's responsibility to its employees is evolving from 2017 to 2022.(4) The company's performance of responsibility to consumers and government during the six years from 2017 to 2022 is good, but ecological responsibility is at a medium level and has some room for development.This paper provides a multidimensional and comprehensive evaluation of the financial indicators of the company from a scientific point of view, which provides some reference for investors and business managers.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".