MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514676647 · doi:10.1109/sai.2016.7555968

An overview of IRFS on Canadian GAAP — Self-organizing maps (SOMs)<sup>MS</sup>

2016· article· en· W2514676647 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venue2016 SAI Computing Conference (SAI) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Reporting and Valuation Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccountingFinancial statementInternational Financial Reporting StandardsComparabilityBusinessProfitability indexLeverage (statistics)Accounting managementFinancial accountingMarket liquidityAccounting standardFinancial ratioAccounting information systemFinanceComputer scienceAudit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study provides an overview of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and highlights implications on Canadian Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (CGAAP) besides the influence IFRS will have on their future representation of Financial Statements - Annual Reports. However, the IFRS has developed a conceptual framework for the preparation and presentation of Financial Statement, and Financial Reporting in order to harmonize accounting standards that are principal-based, internally consistent, and internationally regulated. Then it became apparent that, conversion to IFRS would lead to better comparability and uniformity of financial statements and it could also become sensitive to challenges in application and adoption of their standards. This paper was designed to identify these changes with the use of Neutral Network, such as Self Organization Maps (T Kohoen's SOMs 1997, 2001) as a financial tool to review financial performance of a company over a period of twelve years - pre and post IFRS along with financial ratios, per se Profitability and other ratios such as, Liquidity, Leverage & Coverage, and Efficiency of a Canadian Company.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.228 · 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