MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151358502 · doi:10.1108/eb043403

Italian Accounting Research in the First Half of the 20th Century

2004· article· en· W2151358502 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Accounting and Finance · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement, Economics, and Public Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccountingPeriod (music)Work (physics)Section (typography)EconomyHistoryEconomic historyEconomicsBusinessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper offers a survey of major Italian accounting scholars and their work for the period from 1900 to 1950. Apart from the late works of Rossi and Besta, the main focus is on the contributions by Zappa, who undoubtedly dominated the scene. In this period, as well as later, most Italian accountants and “ aziendalisti ” adopted the so‐called “income system”. Although its premises originated with Fabio Besta, master of the so‐called “patrimonial or proprietorship system”, the Italian School under Zappa gave this system a new theoretical basis that differed fundamentally from that of Besta. Zappa also developed the dynamic aspect of accounting and business economics that still prevails in Italy. The paper also devotes attention to other Italian scholars, less well‐known abroad. In the area of cost accounting it concentrates on the views of De Minico and his disciple Amodeo, but also mentions other contributors. The final Section deals with Italian contributions to accounting history during this period

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.895
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.249 · 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