Former Audit Partners on the Audit Committee and Internal Control Deficiencies
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: This study examines the association between internal control deficiencies (ICDs) reported under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX, U.S. House of Representatives 2002) and the presence of former audit partners on the audit committee who are affiliated (AFAPs) and unaffiliated (UFAPs) with the firm's external auditor. We find a negative association between AFAPs and UFAPs on the audit committee and ICDs. We also find results that suggest the NYSE and NASDAQ three-year “cooling-off” rule applying to AFAPs may be unwarranted and deserves further empirical and regulatory attention. Further tests suggest AFAPs do not allow management to circumvent the disclosure of ICDs when conditions appear to suggest this may be so, and that AFAPs are negatively related to performance-adjusted discretionary accruals. Collectively, we interpret these findings to suggest that AFAPs and UFAPs on the audit committee are associated with more effective monitoring of internal controls and financial reporting.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it