MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2601681378 · doi:10.17722/ijme.v8i2.891

The implementation of Accounting Standards, a necessity of global financial reporting and accounting standards for businesses.

2017· article· en· W2601681378 on OpenAlex
Shefket Zeqir Jakupi, Bedri Statovci

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueInternational Journal of Management Excellence · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSustainability and Innovation in Business
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccountingAccounting standardInternational Financial Reporting StandardsFinancial accountingBusinessInterpretation (philosophy)Accounting information systemGenerally Accepted Auditing StandardsMark-to-market accountingManagement accountingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historically, financial reporting standards have been developed individually by each state. Sometimes standards are set by governments, and in some cases even by the accounting professionals or independent accounting boards.
 This scientific research fills a scientific, theoretical or practical gap, in removing the dilemas regarding pro or against the implementation of IAS / IFRS. This research has been conducted by comparing KAS, laws and regulations of various countries as well as disputes and problems without solutions in the field of accounting, with IAS / IFRS
 Keywords: KAS, IAS, IFRS, alignment, interpretation, approval, implementation.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.709

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.325 · 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