Perspectives on How Robotic Process Automation Is Transforming Accounting and Auditing Services*
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
ABSTRACT The emergence of robotic process automation (RPA) and similar digital technologies is transforming the traditional business models of accounting and auditing services. Such emergence brings valuable benefits. Along with other technologies, RPA represents a significant tool in accounting and auditing services' new digital setting. Despite this, scholarly research on the subject is scarce, particularly concerning the implementation of RPA at accounting and auditing firms. This article provides a literature review of current academic research on RPA in accounting and auditing and proposes future research directions. The review clarifies the use cases of RPA in accounting and auditing. It also reveals that RPA implementation and preparation challenges stem from practical considerations as well as deficits in accountants' applicable education. Thus, the paper is relevant for educators and the accounting profession. Finally, by expanding the discussion of RPA beyond its current focus on accounting and auditing, the authors identify a need for more empirical research on the impact of RPA technology in the post‐implementation stage.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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