MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213010090 · doi:10.5267/j.ac.2021.10.001

A new method for measuring audit expectation gap

2022· article· en· W4213010090 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Phạm Đức Hiếu, Nguyen Thu Hoai

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicResearch studies in Vietnam
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditEmpirical researchComputer scienceData scienceAccountingBusinessMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The term of audit expectation gap (AEG) was created nearly 50 years ago and has received the attention of many researchers. Despite a lot of research on AEG, the method of measuring AEG remains controversial. The number of studies which propose the method of measuring AEG is limited and there are many problems when applying these methods in empirical studies. Inherited from previous studies, this paper aims to develop a new method of measuring AEG and proves it by the results from the application of this method in empirical research in Vietnam. The article achieves two important results: (1) Proposing a new method of measuring AEG based on the Porter’s definition and structure of AEG; and (2) Proving the results from the application of the new method for measuring AEG by conducting empirical research in Vietnam.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.555
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccountingSame topicResearch studies in VietnamFrench-language works237,207