MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Probe into Reasons of Financial & Statistical Accountings Integration and Discussion of Conception L'ETUDE SUR LE CONCEPT DE L'INTEGRATION DE L'APUREMENT COMPTABLE ET L'APUREMENT STATISTIQUE

2010· article· fr· W1936019896 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kan-wei Li, Hong-jie Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstructiveAccountingStatistical analysisNational accountsKey (lock)EconomicsFinanceBusinessComputer scienceProcess (computing)StatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As national economy’s accounting system improves and perfects day by day, financial accounting and statistical accounting, two of the three major accounting components, communicate with each other more and more tightly. To probe into how to strengthen the communication between financial and statistical accountings and seek for the establishment of integrated pattern for financial and statistical accountings will largely improve economic accounting efficiency, reduce economic accounting cost and increase the service value of economic accounting achievements. In this paper the authors analyzes the necessities and conditions of financial and statistical accountings and propose of constructive conception for improving financial and statistical accountings integration based on the exploration and definition of financial and statistical accountings integration with the help of discussion over relationship between financial and statistical accountings.Key Words: Financial Accounting; Statistical Accounting; Integration

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.032
Scholarly communication0.0150.014
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicComplex Systems and Time Series AnalysisFrench-language works237,207