The effect of big data on financial reporting quality
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 current manuscript aimed to explain the impact of big data on the financial reporting quality of the industrial sector in Jordan. To achieve the manuscript goals and validate hypotheses, a field study was conducted by distributing a questionnaire to 325 financial managers in industrial companies listed on the Amman Stock Exchange during a specific period. Gathered data were analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM). The manuscript concluded that the big data dimensions, including variety, volume, and velocity, had a positive impact on financial reporting quality. Therefore, a set of recommendations were provided to managers of the industrial companies in Jordan to put in place an extensive data governance system to as-sure data quality, security, privacy, and compliance. To ensure the integrity and dependability of financial reporting, define data ownership, create data quality standards, and develop processes for data access, use, and preservation.
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 | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| 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