MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390650889 · doi:10.23977/jaip.2023.060902

The Application of Artificial Intelligence in Enterprise Auditing

2023· article· en· W4390650889 on OpenAlex
Yuanyuan Zhao, Jie Wang, Yaling Peng

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 Artificial Intelligence Practice · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicImpact of AI and Big Data on Business and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditComputer scienceKnowledge managementBusinessArtificial intelligenceAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the scope of audit is more and more extensive. The audit business is more and more, and the environment of the auditee is more and more complex. In the big data environment, the data volume of auditees is growing rapidly. All these require auditors to complete more work in a shorter period of time and better complete the audit objectives. The application of artificial intelligence and other technologies can shorten the time of audit data collection and analysis and reduce simple and repetitive labor. It allows the software to learn the audit mindset on its own, so that auditors can devote more energy to solving key problems. At the same time, the artificial intelligence also brings opportunities and challenges to audit work. How to seek advantages and avoid disadvantages is the current artificial intelligence audit needs to be solved.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.275 · 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