OPINION ANALYSIS GOING CONCERN THROUGH AUDITOR QUALITY AND AUDITOR EXPERIENCE
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
The research was conducted in Malang City area with auditor as the population while the sample with pursposive sampling while the data analysis used is variable test with linkert scale and using SPPS statitisk test. In this study conducted at the Public Accounting Firm in Malang, showed that by using validity test, reliability, assumption Heterokedastisitas, multicolinierity assumption test, hypothesis testing simultaneously and partial and autocorrelation test showed that the questionnaire used by the researchers is feasible as a measuring tool for analysis in this study and provide consistent results. In the test results Hypothesis gives results that reject Ho and accept the hypothesis of research Ha, so that the auditor experience and audit quality together provide a significant effect on going concern opinion. Partial experience does not affect the giving of going concern opinion while the quality of audit partially affect the giving of going concern opinion.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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