Sari la conținut

Română · beta. Traducerea a fost făcută automat și este încă în curs de revizuire. Citește pagina în engleză

perspectiva aiqbenchCercetare AI

analiza aiqbench

Composing insight from the full article — this may take a moment.

Surse care acoperăarXiv, LessWrong

Do Earnings Calls Help Predict Financial Restatements? Evaluating Text Beyond Public Firm Information

arXiv2 min de cititArticolul și perspectiva sunt în engleză.

arXiv:2611.01123v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Financial restatements correct errors in previously published financial reports. Could managers' language in earnings calls warn of them in advance? Comparing 109 calls that precede restatements with 218 matched control calls, we find that the text predicts restatements but adds no detectable ranking gain beyond public firm information. A text classifier beats chance, largely because of restatements tied to special-purpose acquisition companies, but a model using only public information scores slightly higher. With refitting, the 95% interval for the gain from adding text (-0.05 to 0.11 AUROC) still leaves room for a meaningful benefit. A large language model scores higher, but we show that it names the exact ticker in 66% of masked transcripts, and it was released after the restatements occurred. Our results suggest that finding new warning signs in call text requires a public-information baseline and a check of what a language model already knows.

Title:Do Earnings Calls Help Predict Financial Restatements? Evaluating Text Beyond Public Firm Information

Abstract:Financial restatements correct errors in previously published financial reports. Could managers' language in earnings calls warn of them in advance? Comparing 109 calls that precede restatements with 218 matched control calls, we find that the text predicts restatements but adds no detectable ranking gain beyond public firm information. A text classifier beats chance, largely because of restatements tied to special-purpose acquisition companies, but a model using only public information scores slightly higher. With refitting, the 95% interval for the gain from adding text (-0.05 to 0.11 AUROC) still leaves room for a meaningful benefit. A large language model scores higher, but we show that it names the exact ticker in 66% of masked transcripts, and it was released after the restatements occurred. Our results suggest that finding new warning signs in call text requires a public-information baseline and a check of what a language model already knows.

Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2611.01123 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2611.01123v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2611.01123 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 258 cuvinte

Subiecte conexe