MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562468790 · doi:10.35800/jjs.v7i2.13559

ANALISIS EXPECTATION GAP ANTARA APARAT PENGAWASAN INTERN PEMERINTAH (APIP) DAN PEMANGKU KEPENTINGAN MENGENAI PERAN DAN INDEPENDENSI APIP DALAM PENGAWASAN PENYUSUNAN ANGGARAN BELANJA DAERAH PADA PEMERINTAH PROVINSI SULAWESI UTARA

2016· article· en· W2562468790 on OpenAlex
Yuanita Iva Maya Singal, David Paul Elia Saerang, Herman Karamoy

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

VenueJURNAL RISET AKUNTANSI DAN AUDITING GOODWILL · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Fiscal Policies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndependence (probability theory)Executive powerWork (physics)Government (linguistics)BusinessAccountingBusiness administrationPolitical scienceEngineeringLawMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As an institution of supervision Inspectorate have a responsibility to review the drafting of RKA SKPD. In carrying out the functions of supervision, often found the existence of the expectation gap i.e. a difference of wishes or expectations of stakeholders towards the APIP work with the reality of the work shown by the APIP. Expectations of stakeholders sometimes exceeds what the roles and responsibilities of APIP. This research aims to analyze the expectation gap between APIP and stakeholders (auditee) regarding the role and independence of the APIP in supervision of the preparation of the regional budget in the Government of North Sulawesi province. This study used a qualitative approach by taking the location of research in 5 (five) SKPD on the Government of North Sulawesi province with criteria of informant is APIP in North Sulawesi Province of Inspectorate with experience more than 5 (five) years and auditee has the task drafting of RKA. The results of this study showed that at the role of APIP, there is no an expectation gap but for the issue of perception the limitation of responsibility of APIP, need to be evaluated especially in things still lacking with regards to his responsibilities include improving the quality of human resources such as the understanding of the regulation and its changes and also their skill. Whereas toward independence, on the issue of the perception of the independence of APIP there is no expectation gap but about the influence of the organizational structure of the role and influence of the role of APIP as a consultant found the existence of the expectation gap. Keywords : Expectation Gap, The Role Of APIP, Independence Of APIP, Supervision of The Formation Of The Regional Budget

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)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.201 · 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