MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895448504 · doi:10.33423/jaf.v18i6.450

Accounting, Taxation, and Auditing Issues Following the Legalization of Recreational Marijuana in Canada: Learning from the American Experience

2018· article· en· W2895448504 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Accounting and Finance · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditPrinciple of legalityAccrualRecreationAccountingBusinessLegalizationSecurities fraudPolitical scienceLawEarnings

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within North American there are several anomalous situations concerning the legality of marijuana either as a medical (legal across Canada but only 23 states) or recreational substance (not currently legal in Canada: legal in eight states and the District of Columbia, however still banned nationally). These situations have led to differences in the business model employed, the recording of accounting transactions on either a cash or accrual basis, and the auditing of public corporations, which may be listed or want to list on stock exchanges. This paper identifies the salient issues and comments on future directions.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.372
Threshold uncertainty score0.621

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Accounting and FinanceSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207