MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1534955925

Auditing & e-Commerce: A Risk Framework

2004· article· en· W1534955925 on OpenAlexaff
Pathak, Cff, Jag

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation and Cyber Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditBusinessAccountingAudit riskCertificationBusiness risksInternal auditRisk analysis (engineering)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The categories of e-commerce, like Business-to-Business (B2B), Business-to-Customers (B2C) and mobile Commerce (m-Commerce) makes use of core technologies different from each other (Salazar et al, 2003; Maxey, 2001) however, the common factor remains unchanged from the auditors' perception, i.e. risk and its potential to harm the integrity and accuracy of the data and decisions based on such data. E-commerce has begun in its varied facets. As an auditor, one may have to audit them. My effort is to identify the risks and show their impact on the assurance of the information system of any organization. AICPA/CICA (Cashell & Aldhizer III, 1999; Primoff, 1998) has jointly offered seal of assurance at web level and system level. The limitations of these certifications are equally important for an auditor as the objectives and the perceptions of these approval auditors are limited to their respective goals established by these accounting bodies. But, the role and functions of an auditor are beyond those of the assurance approval auditors. The organizational decision making processes are dependent on various segments of information bases whereas these assurance providers audit a limited amount related to their interest. This conceptual paper attempts to show why an auditor is expected to provide a much higher level of assurance to the organizational executives amidst a plethora of risks faced by their information and databases and accordingly a framework is provided for auditors to be implemented in the cyber entities under their review.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.232
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicInformation and Cyber SecurityFrench-language works237,207