MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020473096 · doi:10.4018/jgim.2013070104

XBRL

2013· article· en· W2020473096 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Information Management · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Reporting and XBRL
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsXBRLBusiness reportingAuditAccountingBusinessReliability (semiconductor)Computer scienceKnowledge management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ranked as one of top ten technologies for accounting and auditing professionals, eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) is a freely available, open, and global standard language for exchanging business financial information digitally. XBRL holds the greatest promise for building a global standard that is pledged to enhance the accuracy, reliability, efficiency, accessibility and availability of electronic communication of business financial data. This paper sets out to provide a review of literature to lend insights into our understanding of XBRL adoption, implementation, and value realization assessment. A comprehensive review uncovers four sub-themes of research in XBRL adoption: perceived benefits of XBRL adoption; organizational readiness; external pressure; and XBRL adoption. Research challenges for future research are highlighted.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.203 · 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