The Information Economic Perspective of Accounting: Its Coming of Age*/LA COMPTABILITÉ SOUS L'ÉCLAIRAGE DE L'ÉCONOMIQUE DE L'INFORMATION ‐ UNE ÈRE NOUVELLE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Although this paper is not a book review, it discusses several recent publications in the area of information economics as applied to accounting. The major books mentioned and compared are those by Christensen and Demski (2003), the two volumes by Christensen and Feltham (2003, 2005), as well as two German books by Ewert and Wagenhofer (1993/ 2003) and Wagenhofer and Ewert (2003). The paper discusses the contrast between the traditional “value approach” and the more recent “information perspective", as well as the major methodological and theoretical tenets of the latter. Additional sections are devoted to “issues beyond the competence of the information perspective", “opposition and criticism” (with such subsections as “resistance to the mathematical‐analytical approach", the “neglect of traditional accounting terminology", and “other objections"), an inquiring section “toward a general theory of accounting", and, finally, a conclusion from a wider angle.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".