Exploratory Study on the Impact of the Transition to IAS/IFRS on Moroccan Groups <br/>—Case of Performance Indicators
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
Since the entry into force of IAS/IFRS in 2005, the issue of the impact of IAS/IFRS on economic and financial performance has been a complex debate in EU member countries. Indeed, several studies have been carried out in this context, such as Spain (Callao et al., 2007), France (Boukari & Richard, 2007), Canada (Blanchette et al., 2011) … With the exception of the research carried out by Ahsina et al. in 2014, the analysis of the impact of the adoption of IFRS on companies listed on the Casablanca stock exchange has so far remained non-existent in the case of Morocco. As a result, our article aims to study and analyse the impact of the first “IFRS 1” transition on the 16 listed groups on the Moroccan financial market. The results show that there is no significant difference between the financial statements prepared in accordance with Moroccan standards and those prepared in IFRS. The results of our research show that the transition from Moroccan accounting standards (CGNC) to international accounting standards (IAS/IFRS) does not have significant consequences during the first transition period.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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