Coverage of Criticism of Activity-Based Costing in Canadian Textbooks*
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Textbook authors and publishers face a difficult decision regarding coverage of activity-based costing (ABC). ABC could be presented in a strictly positive light, because it enjoyed immense popularity when it was introduced in the 1980s and it is still referred to in favourable terms in practitioner journals. On the other hand, ABC can be criticized on practical and theoretical grounds. Surveys report that a minority of firms adopt ABC, and there are indications of dissatisfaction among some users. In addition, ABC requires direct proportionality and the exclusion of common costs, which are difficult conditions to meet. In this paper, we first describe the practical and theoretical material supporting criticism of ABC that is available to be cited by textbook authors. We then review the coverage of this material in the five textbooks that are most widely used in Canadian universities and colleges.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it