Possibilities of implementation of foreign experience of administrative and legal support of fiscal control in domestic realities (Canadian example)
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
The purpose of the article is to summarize Canada’s experience in providing administrative and legal support for fiscal control. The subject matter of the study is fiscal control in Canada. The methodological basis for the article is a number of modern methods of scientific knowledge, such as: dialectical, logical, monographic, system and structural, methods of modeling and forecasting, documentary analysis, etc. The results of the study can be used to conduct further research on improving fiscal control in Ukraine on the example of leading countries. The scientific novelty of the article is that a comprehensive analysis of Canada’s experience in the field of administrative and legal support for fiscal control is carried out for the first time, as well as the possibility of its implementation in domestic realities is considered. Value / originality. The proposals to improve the system of fiscal control of Ukraine by borrowing certain provisions of the Canadian experience on this issue are formulated.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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