The Effect of IFRS Adoption on Investment Management: A Review of the Literature
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent literature contains a number of studies that provide evidence that improvements in the performance related to business investments are associated with the main positive results of the implementation of international financial reporting standards (hear after IFRS). This study is an effort trying to summarize empirical evidences in current literature about the effect of the IFRS adoption on investment management. We summarize literature on the effect of IFRS a) in a European setting b) in a worldwide setting. We especially refer to the effect of European Crisis on Investment Management. We summarize evidence on the impact of IFRS adoption worldwide on investments assets, foreign direct investments (FDIs), cross boarder investments (Merger and Acquisition activities) and foreign mutual fund ownership. We finally present some evidence on the impact of IFRS adoption on US home bias and try to document the impact of IFRS adoption on international listing and IPOS in global markets.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it