MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2352868212

Recognition of Capitalization for Prepaid Expenses and Drawing Expense in Advance Under New Standard

2012· article· en· W2352868212 on OpenAlexaff
Wang En-wu

Bibliographic record

VenueMechanical Management and Development · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Reporting and Valuation Research
Canadian institutionsNickel Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccounts payableCapitalizationBalance sheetBalance (ability)Actuarial scienceCapital (architecture)BusinessEconomicsAccountingFinancePaymentPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Capital items not in accord with the definition of assets can not be mentioned in the balance sheet.Among these capital items,prepaid expenses and drawing expense in advance are included,under which should be subject to the expense factors under new standard,rather than any assets or account payable factors.Therefore,they can not be mentioned in the balance sheet.However,both of the two items belong to balance in Hand,and the new accounting standard cancelled their usage in 2007.Please refer to the details in this essay how to recognize capitalization for prepaid expenses and drawing expense in advance under new standard.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMechanical Management and DevelopmentSame topicFinancial Reporting and Valuation ResearchFrench-language works237,207