MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407973386 · doi:10.3390/bdcc9030054

Cognitive Computing and Business Intelligence Applications in Accounting, Finance and Management

2025· article· en· W4407973386 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBig Data and Cognitive Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Hong Kong
KeywordsCognitive computingBusiness intelligenceAccountingBusiness managementComputer scienceCognitionFinanceBusinessKnowledge managementPsychologyBusiness administration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cognitive computing encompasses computing tools and methods that simulate and mimic the process of human thinking, without human supervision. Deep neural network architectures, natural language processing, big data tools, and self-learning tools based on pattern recognition have been widely deployed to solve highly complex problems. Business intelligence enhances collaboration among different organizational departments with data-driven conversations and provides an organization with meaningful data interpretation for making strategic decisions on time. Since the introduction of ChatGPT in November 2022, the tremendous impacts of using Large Language Models have been rippling through cognitive computing, business intelligence, and their applications in accounting, finance, and management. Unlike other recent reviews in related areas, this review focuses precisely on the cognitive computing perspective, with frontier applications in accounting, finance, and management. Some current limitations and future directions of cognitive computing are also discussed.

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)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.818

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.251 · 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