Efecto de la publicación de resultados financieros sobre la tendencia en bolsa de las acciones del grupo nutresa. 2015-2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This monograph focuses on the quarter to quarter analysis and monitoring of the financial statements of the Nutresa Group, specifically the balance sheet and the income statement, through which some profitability indicators such as ROE and ROA are applied. In the same way, Ebitda and its margin are established on the company’s operating in come. However, on the other hand, a fundamental type analysis is carried out on the stock market Price of the shares of Grupo Nutresa and how it has been during the 2015-2019 period, in the same way it is evidenced as the changes presented in their financial statements are reflected in the Price of the shares themselves. That is, investors take into account the results reflected in the financial statements, for the purchase of shares, it can be said that in some way the are assured that their investment is generating the expected profit. Then it can be affirmed that the financial statements do intervene in any way in the Price of the shares of Grupo Nutresa.
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 | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".