International Financial Reporting Standards and Orientation of Vietnam: “Roadmap & International 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
Currently, the Ministry of Finance is implementing Decision 480/QD-TTG dated 03/18/2013 of The Prime Minister on approving the Strategy Accounting - Audit 2020, Vision 2030 and implementing the Resolution 35/NQ-CP of the Government dated 16.05.2016 related to the support and development of enterprises by 2020. Accordingly, the development and improvement the legal framework of Financial Reporting standards in Vietnam is one of the key tasks and urgent needs to be developed to meet the requirements of the economy in the period of integration. The system of International Accounting Standards, including the International Accounting Standards (IAS) and the standards of international financial reporting (IFRS) was issued, adjusted, updated and replaced by The International Accounting Standards Board. International Accounting Standards is an important condition to ensure that companies and organizations around the world can apply uniform accounting principles in the work of preparing and presenting financial statements. Currently, many countries around the world such as USA, Japan and European countries, Asia Pacific are approaching IFRS convergence trend. In the trend of globalization of accounting, Vietnam will not be outside the process of integration with the system of International Financial Reporting Standards. This article will review the process of formation and development of IFRS, the IFRS trends and the advantages and disadvantages of applying IFRS in Vietnam.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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