A scoping review of ChatGPT research in accounting and finance
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: Systematic reviewConsensus signal: none
- Genre
- Candidate signal: ReviewConsensus signal: Review
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.572
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 1.000
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
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
Abstract
This paper provides a review of recent publications and working papers on ChatGPT and related Large Language Models (LLMs) in accounting and finance. The aim is to understand the current state of research in these two areas and identify potential research opportunities for future inquiry. We identify three common themes from these earlier studies. The first theme focuses on applications of ChatGPT and LLMs in various fields of accounting and finance. The second theme utilizes ChatGPT and LLMs as a new research tool by leveraging their capabilities such as classification, summarization, and text generation. The third theme investigates implications of LLM adoption for accounting and finance professionals, as well as for various organizations and sectors. While these earlier studies provide valuable insights, they leave many important questions unanswered or partially addressed. We propose venues for further exploration and provide technical guidance for researchers seeking to employ ChatGPT and related LLMs as a tool for their research.
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.
The record
- Venue
- International Journal of Accounting Information Systems
- Topic
- Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance
- Field
- Business, Management and Accounting
- Canadian institutions
- University of Waterloo
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- AccountingAccounting researchBusinessAccounting information system
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes