MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3029258027 · doi:10.4337/9781839105999.00010

Investigation of corporate scandals

2020· book-chapter· en· W3029258027 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Petter Gottschalk

Bibliographic record

VenueEdward Elgar Publishing eBooks · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Illicit Activities, and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhite-collar crimeAuditAccountingWhite (mutation)BusinessEconomic historyLawPolitical scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Corporate white-collar crime scandals are often investigated by global accounting firms and local law firms. This chapter introduces thirteen investigations conducted by global auditing firms Deloitte, KPMG, and PwC, and by local law firms Bruun Hjejle, Jenner Block, Mannheimer Swartling, Shearman Sterling, and Wilmer Cutler Pickering. All thirteen reports of investigations from Canada, Denmark, Japan, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Sweden, and the United States are in English.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEdward Elgar Publishing eBooksSame topicCrime, Illicit Activities, and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207