Research on Financial Performance Evaluation of Pharmaceutical Enterprises Based on Big Data Analysis and Their Digital Development Paths
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Under the background of the development of digital economy industry, more and more enterprises begin to make attempts of digital change.After constructing the financial performance index system of pharmaceutical enterprises, the study selects 30 pharmaceutical listed companies as the research samples, and evaluates their financial performance by using the principal component analysis method and the collected relevant data.On this basis, the study selects indicators of digitalization degree and puts forward research hypotheses, explores the influence of digitalization degree on the financial performance of pharmaceutical enterprises through correlation analysis, multiple regression analysis and time lag effect analysis, and then puts forward the path of digitalization development of pharmaceutical enterprises in combination with the results of the analysis.The results show that the financial performance of the sample pharmaceutical enterprises is at a medium level, with an average composite score of 0.520, among which pharmaceutical enterprises E10, E6 and E22 have the best performance, with scores above 0.9.The degree of digitization has a negative impact on the financial performance of enterprises at the 1% level, but the coefficient of digital capital investment turns from negative to positive after the lag two period, and there is a time-lag effect of digitization on the financial performance of pharmaceutical enterprises.It is recommended to promote the digitalization of pharmaceutical enterprises by encouraging the cultivation of digital talents, improving the law and cultivating thinking, and building a digital platform.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".