MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W138564418

Международная практика финансового планирования

2012· article· ru· W138564418 on OpenAlex
С. Ю. Попков

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

VenueБизнес в законе. Экономико-юридический журнал · 2012
Typearticle
Languageru
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Issues in Ukraine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerm (time)ReceiptEconomicsBusinessAccountingRegional scienceGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the follow article there were given an examples of budgetary planning on the basis of countries with high level of economic development, such as: Great Britain, Austria, Germany, Canada, Australia. Along with the essential distinctions, that were observed in their forecasting policy, there were allocated the general tendency to construction of long-term plans of means receipt into the budget. Considerable attention has been devoted to examples of construction of intermediate term financial plans. The most popular methods of intermediate term forecasting has been considered in detail, their advantages and lacks has been described, the comparative analysis has been carried out.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.079

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.184 · 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