MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128466477 · doi:10.5430/afr.v4n3p106

The Impairment of Long-Lived Assets and Reversing Revaluation Review under US GAAP VS. IFRS Models in the United States

2015· article· en· W2128466477 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Karina Kasztelnik

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting and Finance Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValuation (finance)AccountingMultinational corporationBusinessInternational Financial Reporting StandardsReversingPerspective (graphical)Empirical evidenceManagement accountingActuarial scienceEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impairment valuation of assets plays a central role in the accounting and operating decisions of the multinational companies. Although these techniques based on a similar theory, they may generate different results in application. This study incorporates an empirical approach to compare the outcomes of the two valuations: under US GAAP and IFRS (International Financial Reporting Standards). The aim of this study it to make the observation whether these valuation methods result in different values and to contribute to the understanding of why these two valuations, although similar in theory, may generate different results when applied to real life companies. In addition, this study will respond to readers this article, what kind of the management decision should make CEO before the first-time adoption IFRS in the U.S.A from management accounting perspective. This article will help the audience develop and internalize a model for making business judgments.

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 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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.355
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccounting and Finance ResearchSame topicAuditing, Earnings Management, GovernanceFrench-language works237,207