MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978018654 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v3n3p141

Primary Research of the Advantages and the Cost Control of the ABC & EVA Integrated System

2010· article· en· W1978018654 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueInternational Business Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicValue Engineering and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActivity-based costingCost accountingTotal absorption costingTarget costingCapital costBusinessProduct cost managementProduct (mathematics)Computer scienceWeighted average cost of capitalTotal costCost driverEconomic Value AddedOperations managementReliability engineeringCost engineeringEconomicsAccountingMathematicsEngineeringMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The integrated product of Activity-Based Costing (ABC) and Economic Value Added (EVA) is the ABC & EVA system, i.e. the integrated cost system. Traditional ABC method gives priority to the interior activity chain of enterprise to implement the cost analysis, but ignores the capital cost, so the cost accounting is not complete. The ABC & EVA system brings the capital cost into the cost management, which could not only open out the real economic value created by the cost objects, but extend the pure cost computation of ABC to the performance evaluation. Based on the principle of the ABC & EVA system, the enterprise cost control strategies under the integrated cost system are proposed.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.774
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.290 · 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