MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159548981 · doi:10.17233/se.02348

Türkiye'de Vergi Denetim Sistemi ve Sistemin Aksaklıklarının Değerlendirilmesi

2014· article· tr· W2159548981 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

VenueSosyoekonomi · 2014
Typearticle
Languagetr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Administration and Governance
Canadian institutionsCargill (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Beyan esasının geçerli olduğu ülkelerde mükelleflerin vergisel işlemlerinin denetlenmesi, sistemin olmazsa olmazlarındandır. Vergi denetimleri; bütçeye olan katkıları, devletin hükümranlık gücünün ispatı vb. nedenlerle büyük öneme sahiptirler. Ancak denetim faaliyetlerinin etkinliği birçok kurumsal ve yapısal etkene bağlıdır. Bu konuda vatandaşlara ve devlete büyük görevler düşmektedir. Türk Vergi Sisteminde 646 Sayılı Kanun Hükmünde Kararname ile vergi idarelerinde otomasyona geçilmesi, mükelleflerin bilinçlendirilmesi gibi alanlarda umut verici çalışmalar yapılsa da bu uygulamalar yetersiz kalmaktadır. Güçlü bir bütçe, güçlü bir vergi sisteminden, güçlü bir vergi sistemi ise etkin ve verimli bir vergi denetim sisteminden geçer. Çalışma mükelleflerin vergi denetimi esnasında karşılaştıkları aksaklıkları değerlendirmektedir.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.269 · 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