Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to revisit the foundations of profit and then consider the central role of the profit in the society inspired by the accounting practice, through its influence in the social construction of the accountant's competency, and of the use accounting profession itself. Design/methodology/approach Inspired largely by the sociology of the professions, this paper also borrows from classical economic theory to understand the contradictory role and functioning of the conventional notion of profit in the society. Findings The paper presents the accountant as the master and great academic of this convention, and the profit as constituting for him a key resource in establishing an undisputed consensus around his competency based on a social valorization. This sacralization originates from the emptying of the economic concept while referring constantly to it. Therefore, the meaning is noisy and then, can be manipulated. Originality/value The profit is the main product sell by the accounting profession and the accounting notion most widely discussed in the society. Therefore, to understand its social functioning is essential to understand the social role of accounting and the social statute of accountants.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".