Management Accounting and Digital Technologies: A Science mapping review
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
This study applied science mapping techniques to provide an overview of the scientific production of management accounting and digital technologies. It was considered a sample of 128 articles extracted from Scopus and WoS. Results showed that almost 80% of the articles analyzed were published in the last five years. This growth in scientific production is mainly due to technological advancements, demand for real-time information, regulatory changes and accounting standards, the need for efficiency and cost control, and the growing interest in sustainability and social responsibility issues. The conceptual structure of this sample was grouped into four clusters: digital strategy adoption, digital financial innovation, digital transformation strategies, and digital and financial sustainability. Based on the gaps identified, future research should explore management accounting and AI-based technologies within the government sector, SMEs, environmental sustainability issues, and curricular changes in university accounting courses.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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