MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174739685 · doi:10.2308/jiar-17-546

Liquidity and IFRS Adoption in Canada

2021· article· en· W3174739685 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of International Accounting Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarket liquidityBusinessAccountingSample (material)Control sampleQuality (philosophy)Control (management)International Financial Reporting StandardsFinanceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We examine cross-sectional differences in changes in liquidity for Canadian firms between pre-IFRS and post-IFRS adoption based on their pre-IFRS disclosure quality. In a matched-sample analysis, with U.S. firms acting as control firms, we find that liquidity improved after mandatory IFRS adoption for Canadian companies with high pre-IFRS disclosure quality, but declined for Canadian companies with low pre-IFRS disclosure quality, in comparison to U.S. peers. We find similar results when we stratify the sample based on total assets—larger Canadian firms gained liquidity, while smaller Canadian firms lost liquidity, relative to the U.S. control firms. Our results are sustained when we use firms listed in Canada that report under U.S. GAAP before and after IFRS adoption as control firms.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.249
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.260 · 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