MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098388211 · doi:10.1109/hicss.2001.927080

Continuous audit implications of Internet technology: triggering agents over the Web in the domain of debt covenant compliance

2005· article· en· W2098388211 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jon Woodroof, DeWayne L. Searcy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Process Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompliance (psychology)CovenantThe InternetAuditBusinessDebtComputer scienceWorld Wide WebAccountingFinancePsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants have together called on the research community to show how continuous audit (CA) could be implemented in various auditing domains. In response to this call, we look at the domain of debt covenant compliance, and we utilize Cold Fusion, a leading Web applications development technology, to design and demonstrate an implementation of a continuous process audit within this domain. We design and demonstrate a system that uses agents sent over the Internet to continuously monitor whether actual values of client's variables are in compliance with standards for these variables set out in the debt covenant agreement-all from a remote location, the loan officer's desk.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBusiness Process Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207