Demand for and Assessment of Audit Quality in Private Companies
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
Financial statement audits are mandated in most countries, thus making it difficult to distinguish between auditing driven by private incentives versus that driven by regulation. Who would ask for an audit, and how would its quality be assessed in the absence of regulation? Many private companies in Canada get their financial statements audited even though the law does not require it. In this field study, we conduct interviews to discover reasons for demanding an audit, and criteria used to assess their quality. Our study reveals that both internal stakeholders (management, boards, and employees) as well as external stakeholders (customers, banks, and private equity firms) request audits. Users evaluate audit quality based on a variety of criteria such as the auditor's accounting expertise, the absence of errors, the fees involved, risk assessments offered, allocation of effort, internal control, and general business advice. Implications for audit regulations are discussed.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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