MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994055719 · doi:10.12735/jbm.v3i3p08

The only Correct Calculation Method in Cost Management: From Activity Based Costing Perspective

2014· article· en· W2994055719 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Miroslav Škoda, Gabriela Sláviková, Daniel Lajcin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Business & Management · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActivity-based costingPerspective (graphical)Cost accountingComputer scienceOperations managementOperations researchMathematicsEngineeringBusinessArtificial intelligenceAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In late 1980’s National Association of Accountants had introduced Activity-based costing – a cost accounting technique which charges organization’s indirect costs to the activities that cause the costs to be incurred and then distributes costs of activities to the products that cause the activities to be performed. Activity-based costing as a management tool has proved its relevance and found its proponents among academics and managers. Introduction of the time aspect into Activity-based costing proved that it is still attracting attention and undergoing development in order to become more accurate. The paramount goal of the implementation is to prove the increased effectiveness and superiority of cost management when using Activity-based costing. It will be achieved by allocation of overhead costs to products with the intention to determine unit costs. This process of

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.011
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Business & ManagementSame topicAccounting and Organizational ManagementFrench-language works237,207