MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3170245693 · doi:10.1111/1911-3838.12265

To Be or Not to Be: Blockchain and the Future of Accounting and Auditing<sup>*</sup>

2021· article· en· W3170245693 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting Perspectives · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlockchainAuditAccountingBusinessSoftware deploymentAccounting information systemWork (physics)Function (biology)Computer scienceEngineeringComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The purpose of this article is to study the potential impact of blockchain technology on accounting systems and businesses. Blockchain technology characteristics and operating modes have the potential to bring about innovations to the fields of accounting and auditing. After describing the function of blockchain technology, we examine potential accounting transformations and identify how the deployment of this technology might impact accountants and external auditors. To that end, we review the literature and take a prospective approach to the use of blockchain in accounting and auditing. Three major issues regarding the future of blockchain in accounting and auditing emerge: (i) the transformation of accounting techniques; (ii) main evolutions in accounting and auditing; and (iii) main evolutions in the work, skills, and education of auditors.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.243 · 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