The disclosure of enterprise risk management (ERM) information: An overview of Canadian regulations for risk disclosure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper discusses the mandatory risk disclosures in Canada under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). U.S. mandatory accounting disclosures of risk are also briefly examined, since some Canadian companies are cross-listed in the US. Mandatory disclosures of risk under the Basel II and Basel III Accords for the international regulation of banks are discussed as well as the assessment of ERM by Standard & Poor’s. The risk disclosures in the Management Discussion & Analysis (MD&A) section of the annual report prescribed by the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) in National Instrument 51-102 Continuous Disclosure Obligations are examined. Since these risk disclosures are voluntary, the actual disclosures in the MD&A section of the annual report are entirely at the discretion of management subject to effective board oversight.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".