MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W112047905

A Napster for Financial Data? A Boon to Financial Planners and Individual Investors

2003· article· en· W112047905 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of accountancy online/Journal of accountancy · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Reporting and XBRL
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinanceXBRLBusinessAudit trailEconomicsAuditAccounting
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Imagine this: any time of the day or night, and with just a few clicks of the mouse, a financial planner or an individual investor can access a company's present and past financial reports in extraordinary detail. In addition, an array of instant analyses of those data can be performed, which displays them either graphically or as conventional financial statements. Within seconds a user can compare a company's balance sheets with those of several competitors, examine an enterprise's debt-to-equity ratio in any fiscal period, chart its stock price history and download an audit client's major nonfinancial news. As if that's not enough, the same range of analyses can be performed for any public company worldwide and the information even can be converted into any currency. No way, you're probably thinking. At least not in my lifetime. Think again. All the underlying technology--XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language)--for it is available right now. All that's missing is a standardized protocol to implement it--and the first steps for creating such a protocol to perform those feats have been taken. A team comprising the Nasdaq Stock Market, Microsoft and PricewaterhouseCoopers just launched a pilot project designed to demonstrate that the concept of making both the data and the analysis tools available on the Internet is not only feasible but both practical and sought by financial professionals, investors and regulators. If you want to see what the future looks like, just point your Web browser to www.nasdaq.com/xbrl (see exhibit 1, below) and download a free demonstration file called the Excel Investor's Assistant. You'll need Excel 2000 or later to run the demo. [EXHIBIT 1 OMITTED] Once you're at the site, follow the instructions to install the pilot. When done, click on the file, Excel Investors Assistant.xls. You will be asked whether you want Excel to enable macros; you do, so click on the Enable Macros box (see exhibit 2, at right). [EXHIBIT 2 OMITTED] That will bring up the opening screen of Investor's Assistant (see exhibit 3, below). [EXHIBIT 3 OMITTED] The Investor's Assistant file contains two components: an Excel spreadsheet with built-in data analysis macros and formulas and a linked database that contains five years of financial information on 21 companies. The financial information, however, is not just raw data--that is, it's not just a compilation of financial numbers. Instead, each item in the database has been labeled with an XBRL tag that identifies the item as, for example, revenue, profit or short-range debt. The XBRL tags are based on standardized accounting definitions customized for various industries. (For more on XBRL, see Finally, Business Talks the Same Language, JofA, Aug.00, page 24.) A growing number of accounting software developers are incorporating XBRL into their products so a tag automatically gets attached to each item of financial information as it is entered and subsequently calculated by the accounting software. The tags eventually will be useful for anyone compiling both internal and external financial reports and tax returns. Because many industries have unique categories of financial data, an international consortium of more than 170 companies is preparing customized XBRL dictionaries, called taxonomies, that optimize the XBRL definitions so the tags can handle any special reporting structure. The goal is to make XBRL a fully universal financial information language that is both automatically attached to the data and transparent to the viewer. The XBRL International consortium was founded by the AICPA in 1999 and currently has active chapters in Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, United States and Singapore. Chapters are being developed in Belgium, Hong Kong, India, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, South Africa, Spain, Sweden and Taiwan. …

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.227 · 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