MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2787881171 · doi:10.5267/j.ac.2017.11.002

The effect of automated information systems on the Kenyan county government’s operations: A case study of Kiambu county government

2018· article· en· W2787881171 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muraya Brenda Wairimu, Richard Bitange Nyaoga

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicTaxation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKenyaRevenueOperationalizationBusinessDatabase transactionGovernment (linguistics)Transparency (behavior)Information systemCorporate governanceOperations managementAccountingFinanceProcess managementEngineeringComputer scienceComputer securityPolitical scienceDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accounting plays a very crucial role in the management and success or failure of most organizations.As a system, automated information system records and processes data of transaction and events into useful information for use in planning, controlling and operation of businesses.Kenya is a growing economy, and the global pressure has forced it to embrace E-Governance practices.As a result, ways to improve their operations have been placed.This study aimed at establishing the effect of implementing Automated Information Systems (AIS) on the County Government's operations.The County operations were classified in terms of transparency and record keeping as well as supervision while the AIS was operationalized in terms of the Zizi System, the County Pro System and the Integrated Financial Management Information System (IFMIS).This study employed complete enumeration survey method to collect data from all the twelve sub-counties in Kiambu, Kenya.The respondents were the IT managers, Financial Officers, and the Revenue Officers.Multiple regression was used to test the effect of AIS on the Kenya County Governments' operation.The findings of this study indicate that implementing the Automated Information Systems had a significant positive effect on the county government's operations..

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccountingSame topicTaxation and Compliance StudiesFrench-language works237,207