MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7126489666

Lehman Brothers (A) and (B)

2024· other· en· W7126489666 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCBS Research Portal (Copenhagen Business School) · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemiseBankruptcyQuarter (Canadian coin)InsolvencyFinancial services
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Lehman Brothers (A) and (B) cases give two different reference frames to ascertain the performance of this global financial services company. The first case presents the company in early 2008 after the release of its 2007 annual accounts and first quarter SEC 10-Q filing. The second case refers to late 2008 after the bank filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on September 15 as an attempt to present what really happened and thereby explain why things could evolve the way they eventually did. <br/>Lehman Brothers (A) does not reveal anything about the bank’s subsequent demise and thus encourages readers to assess the bank’s financial standing and potential exposures based on public data accessible at the time.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient 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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.235
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3120.547

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.313 · 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; both teacher heads 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCBS Research Portal (Copenhagen Business School)French-language works237,207