MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386712664 · doi:10.1111/1911-3838.12344

Financial Reporting &amp; Assurance Standards (<scp>FRAS</scp>) Canada Corner

2023· article· en· W4386712664 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting Perspectives · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal and Policy Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitationAccountingLibrary scienceBusinessComputer scienceFinancePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

FRAS Canada Corner is a quarterly update from Canada's financial reporting and assurance standards-setting Boards: the Accounting Standards Board (AcSB), the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AASB), the Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB), and the Canadian Sustainability Standards Board (CSSB).These updates focus on the Boards' meeting discussions, commentary on proposed standards, and status updates on active projects.Information discussed at Board meetings has been organized by topic.The column reflects Board decisions and discussion topics available at the time of publication.Learn more about the topics from our podcasts, videos, and other features as well as the latest information on the Boards' activities at FRASCanada.ca.La rubrique Bulletin de NIFC Canada fait le point, chaque trimestre, sur les travaux des conseils canadiens de normalisation en matire d'information financire et de certification : le Conseil des normes comptables (CNC), le Conseil des normes d'audit et de certification (CNAC), le Conseil sur la comptabilit dans le secteur public (CCSP), et le Conseil canadien des normes d'information sur la durabilit (CCNID).Le bulletin offre des comptes rendus des discussions lors des runions des conseils, prsente des observations sur les normes proposes et fait le point sur des projets en cours.Il reflte les dcisions et sujets de discussion des conseils au moment de la publication.Les discussions des conseils sont organises par sujet.Le site Web NIFCCanada.ca offre de plus amples renseignements ainsi que des balados, des vidos et les plus rcentes nouvelles relatives aux activits des conseils.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.321 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccounting PerspectivesSame topicLegal and Policy IssuesFrench-language works237,207