MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041794500 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v11n4p296

Board of Directors and Financial Reporting Quality in Vietnam Listed Companies

2020· article· en· W3041794500 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Reporting and Valuation Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessAuditAccountingIndependence (probability theory)Quality (philosophy)Audit committeeStock (firearms)Regression analysisFinanceEngineeringStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article studies the impact of the Board of Directors (BOD) on financial reporting quality (FRQ) in Vietnam listed companies. The research uses FEM, REM and GLS regression models, data collected at energy enterprises listed on the stock market in Vietnam from 2010 - 2018, with 2162 observations. The research results have found that the BOD size, BOD independence, BOD chairperson cum CEO has a positive impact on FRQ while BOD meeting frequency has a negative impact on FRQ. In addition, the audit quality, the ratio of liabilities has a positive impact on FRQ while company size has a negative impact on FRQ. Further, the percentage of female BOD members does not have an impact on FRQ. Empirical research results serve as a useful basis for enterprises to improve FRQ by considering of factors of the board of director in a more effective manner.

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.081
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score0.927

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.081
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.238
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.215 · 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