MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3171670034

전자상거래 인증서비스에 관한 연구

2002· article· ko· W3171670034 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
김정찬, 김태수, 장석오

Bibliographic record

Venue경영과 정보연구 · 2002
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessAccountingAuditService (business)E-commerceElectronic tradingOrder (exchange)MarketingFinancePolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In December 1999, the AICPA introduced WebTrust, a electronic commerce assurance service of ensuring safe trading on the web, in order to effect consumer confidence into electronic commerce. Shortly afterwards, CPA associations of other advanced nations, such as Canada, Australia, also adopted this service. This study focuses on introduction of electronic commerce assurance service of ensuring safe trading on the web. WebTrust assurance service expected to be the international standard in electronic commerce in the near future and not only as a source of income for domestic accounting firms, which have simpler income structure than the international counterparts, but also as catalyst for stimulating electronic commerce. The findings of the study are expected to contribute to accounting practice, academy of accounting and electronic commerce firms in the following ways. Domestically, as Korea is considering using the electronic commerce assurance service, this study will help promote adoption of WebTrust assurance service. This study has shown, in the midst of declining income of accounting firms by audit, a way to increase their audit boundary.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.015

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue경영과 정보연구→Same topicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance→French-language works237,207→