ELECTRONIC DISCLOSURE AND FINANCIAL KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT
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
In this paper, we reported the benefits of using eXtended Markup Language (XML) to support financial knowledge management and discussed number of issues associated with developing an XML-based financial knowledge management system. Current searching engines do not provide sufficient performance in terms of recall, precision, and extensibility for financial knowledge management, because the data represented in HTML format cannot support financial knowledge management effectively. On the other hand, XML provides a vendor-neutral approach to structure and organize contents as XML authors are allowed to create arbitrary tags to describe the format or structure of data. A prototype of XML-based ELectronic Financial Filing System (ELFFS-XML) is developed, and value-added services such as automatic tag generation and cross-linking related information from different data sources are provided to enable knowledge representation and knowledge generation. We compared the XML-based ELFFS with the original HTML-based ELFFS and SEDAR - an electronic filing system used in Canada, and we found that ELFFS-XML is able to provide much more functionalities to support knowledge management. We also compared our automatic tag generation result with the experts' and investors' choices, and recommended some directions for future development of similar electronic filing systems.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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