MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046010090 · doi:10.4018/ijeis.2013100107

Extensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL): Potential of Research in XBRL as a Social Artifact- An Essay

2013· article· en· W2046010090 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

VenueInternational Journal of Enterprise Information Systems · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Reporting and XBRL
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsXBRLBusiness reportingArtifact (error)NarrativeData scienceComputer scienceAccountingKnowledge managementBusinessArtificial intelligenceLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this brief theoretical narrative, the author intends to present a thought piece which would suggest that study of eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) is not relevant to technological or financial domains alone. XBRL usage in the World of finance can easily bring out its impact on the society at large through its users in the finance and investment areas. XBRL is simply not a technological artifact alone but has turned into a social artifact. The author, therefore, proposes that future researchers of information systems should also look into the impact of XBRL on the society as a whole. This essay takes a foundational step toward a paradigm and suggests how one might usefully augment further studies with research on XBRL as social artifacts.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score0.817

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.006
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.306 · 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