MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289177600 · doi:10.3390/jrfm15080335

Introduction of a Corporate Security Risk Management System: The Experience of Poland

2022· article· en· W4289177600 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Iryna Kalina, Viktoriia Khurdei, Віра Шевчук, Тетяна Власюк, Іhor Leonidov

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBanking, Crisis Management, COVID-19 Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessAuditAccountingRisk managementInternal auditInformation technology auditIT risk managementSecurity managementAudit planFinanceRisk analysis (engineering)Joint audit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To ensure the economic security of companies, it is necessary to introduce a risk management system based on the use of various tools, especially financial ones. The purpose of the article is to scientifically substantiate the paradigm of integration of the risk management mechanism into the system of economic security in companies on the basis of risk-oriented management. The main study method was an online survey of 50 Polish companies in January–April 2021 using a developed questionnaire consisting of 40 questions. According to the results of the expert survey, it is determined that regardless of the type of economic activity of the enterprise, the main goal of introducing risk-oriented management is to preserve assets and increase the efficiency of financial and economic processes. The introduction of risk-oriented management is perceived as a tool to increase the value of the company and ensure the achievement of strategic goals. Fraud is a significant risk to the state of economic security for modern enterprises. To prevent the fact of fraud, taking into account the specifics of the operation of companies, it is suggested to conduct an annual examination. As a result, the suggested procedure should include an audit (audit of financial statements, forensics, transition to international financial reporting standards, audit of systems and processes), assessment (assessment for audit and reporting in accordance with international financial reporting standards, risk management assessment in accordance with international standards, assessment of the effectiveness of economic security), tax analytics (identification of tax risks, analysis of compliance with tax legislation, tax audit), and a due diligence procedure for investment objects.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.206
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicBanking, Crisis Management, COVID-19 ImpactFrench-language works237,207