MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128425782 · doi:10.1177/1032373212463270

An institutional perspective on the development of Canada’s first public accounts

2012· article· en· W2128425782 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting History · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDominionPoliticsJurisdictionPerspective (graphical)LegislationInstitutionInstitutional changePolitical scienceInstitutional theoryInstitutional analysisPublic administrationSociologyLaw and economicsPolitical economyLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the Dominion of Canada’s first accounting system from the perspective of institutional theory. We find that Canada’s first accounting system was a continuation of an institution-building process begun earlier in the former Province of Canada. We argue that the political upheaval associated with the dissolution of one political jurisdiction and the creation of a new country created conditions conducive to institutional persistence rather than change, and that persistence was supported by continuity of the legislation and important agents that bridged the organizational discontinuity created by the confederation event.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.171 · 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