Bibliographic record
Abstract
La literatura contable en lengua inglesa ofrece relativamente poca información sobre las investigaciones y publicaciones realizadas en Latinoamérica, tanto en el pasado como en la actualidad. Con el objetivo de contribuir a cerrar la brecha, hemos investigado esta temática en la Argentina. Comenzamos con una breve descripción de nuestra metodología; luego exponemos la evolución de las instituciones contables argentinas y su estrecha relación con la academia, así como la de sus revistas de contabilidad. Después nos concentramos en la influencia extranjera (española, francesa, italiana, norteamericana, inglesa y alemana) en las publicaciones contables argentinas a inicios del siglo 20. A continuación, realizamos un revisión de las publicaciones de contabilidad argentinas durante la primera mitad del siglo veinte, y sus autores más relevantes. El resto del trabajo trata principalmente de los autores y publicaciones de la segunda mitad del siglo veinte (y la influencia anglo-americana) desde el punto de vista de sub-áreas tales como la teoría general de la contabilidad, contabilidad financiera, auditoría, contabilidad de costos y contabilidad gerencial, contabilidad social y contabilidad gubernamental.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.165 | 0.086 |
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".