MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411656544 · doi:10.51847/jk2jghwa5v

10.51847/jk2JGhwA5V

2000· article· en· W4411656544 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTime to knit · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock exchangeEarnings managementMarket liquidityBusinessLeverage (statistics)EarningsMonetary economicsFinancial systemEconomicsFinanceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Earnings management is one of the most popular subjects among investors, legislators, analysts, and financial statements' users.According to Fischer, earnings management is the managers' purposeful intervention in the extra organizational financial reporting procedure.Improving the audit quality is one of the ways to reduce earnings management because those companies that manipulate and manage profits are more prone to have a modified audit report (unacceptable).The main aim of the current research is to examine the effect of financial leverage and liquidity on the earnings management and capital in companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange.The statistical population of this study is the companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange for a six-year period from the beginning of 2011 to the end of 2016.The results of this research designate that there is a significant relationship between financial leverage and the ratio of liquidity variables with earnings management listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange.The results specify that there is no significant relationship between the financial leverage and the liquidity ratio with the capital of the companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.9670.961

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 head0.168
Teacher spread0.162 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTime to knit→Same topicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies→French-language works237,207→