MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409794833 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-517

Research on Computational Simulation and Capital Structure Adjustment in Corporate Investment and Financing Decisions under ESG Rating Mechanisms

2025· article· en· W4409794833 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSustainable Finance and Green Bonds
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessFinanceInvestment (military)Corporate financeCapital structureInvestment decisionsCapital investmentBehavioral economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problems of debt value and optimal capital structure of enterprises are the main issues in corporate finance research.Under the ESG rating mechanism, the article first utilizes the real option theory to study the optimal capital structure and investment and financing decision-making methods of enterprises.Then it puts forward model assumptions and combines the jump diffusion model for the construction of enterprise project investment and financing decision-making model and the dynamic planning adjustment of capital structure.Finally, through specific numerical experiments, the influence process of each variable in the model on the enterprise investment and financing decision is analyzed, and the agency problem is analyzed.Through the experiment, it can be obtained that when the residual value after stopping production, the risk-free interest rate, the variable production cost and the tax rate are set to  =1, r =0.1,  =0.1,  =0.2, respectively, with the increase of the frequency of the jump, the investment price of the positive-jump model gradually decreases, and the investment price of the negative-jump model gradually increases, which can be obtained that the reasonable simulation estimation of the relevant parameters has an important impact on the enterprise's investment strategy, so the enterprise should make a more accurate assessment of the parameters, otherwise they will lose part of the benefits or lose good investment opportunities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicSustainable Finance and Green BondsFrench-language works237,207