MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388567779 · doi:10.3390/jrfm16110478

Implementing Triple Entry Accounting as an Audit Tool—An Extension to Modern Accounting Systems

2023· article· en· W4388567779 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUkrainian Legal and Forensic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsAccountingAuditAudit trailAccounting information systemFair valueLedgerBusinessComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the technological leaps modern accounting systems have brought about, fraud is still prevalent. This necessitates spending time and money on audits. Connecting modern accounting ledgers to a public blockchain would make accounting records easily verifiable, aiding the audit evidence gathering and analytics process. Continuous audits will be made viable by readily available audit evidence from the public blockchain. The proposed audit solution creates verifiable “Financial Fingerprints” (signed indexes) for every accounting entry. These Financial Fingerprints are then published to a certain range of addresses on the public blockchain. The objective is to help accounting ledgers be structured in a Triple Entry Accounting format. The third entry can be defined as publishing a notarized index of each accounting entry to the public blockchain. The crux of Triple Entry Accounting is atomicity, meaning there can only be one book. Trying to present an alternative set of books would still be possible, but it would be automatically detected. The method used to achieve the objective can be presented as two value propositions. The first value proposition of Triple Entry Accounting is to define a provable official true set of books. This is important because it is a door into the market without being dependent on network effects. The second value proposition of Triple Entry Accounting is to break down the data silos by using the blockchain as a shared ledger and thus help auditors immensely in their tedious work to gather sufficient and appropriate audit evidence. Because of value proposition number one, Triple Entry Accounting presents standalone value even before the network effect begins. The result of this is an open standardized protocol for implementing Triple Entry Accounting as an extension to modern accounting systems.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.269 · 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