MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2170986082

A STUDY OF THE ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL REPORTING STANDARDS IN THE TWO EU COUNTRIES OF DENMARK AND IRELAND AND NEW ZEALAND, A NON EU COUNTRY

2008· preprint· en· W2170986082 on OpenAlexafffund
Claus Holm, Finn Schøler, Henrik Lønne, Michael Maingot

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsAccountingInternational Financial Reporting StandardsBusinessEnforcementEarly adopterLegislatureDanishQuality (philosophy)Political scienceMarketing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Accounting Standards Board has as its mission the development of a singlet set of high quality standards to be applied consistently by companies globally. The purpose of this paper is to examine the implementation process to integrate IFRS in the smaller and developed countries of Denmark, Ireland and New Zealand. The paper examines the enablers for successful IFRS implementation, namely, Legislative changes, Accounting profession, Stock exchanges, Enforcement, Early adopters in 2004, and Adopters in 2005. An examination of the top 30 companies' annual reports for the three countries was made to test for voluntary compliance of IFRS in 2004 and mandatory compliance in 2005. The results show that Denmark is the only country with early adopters in 2004. All 30 Danish companies complied in 2005, with 24 in Ireland, and 9 in New Zealand.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance→French-language works237,207→