MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409238745 · doi:10.5430/afr.v14n2p13

The Impact of the Use of Artificial Intelligence on the Development of External Audit Efficiency in Jordanian Mining and Extractive Corporations

2025· article· en· W4409238745 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ali Mustafa Magablih

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting and Finance Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOrganizational and Employee Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditBusinessAccountingOperations managementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to identify the impact of the use of artificial intelligence on the development of external audit efficiency in Jordanian public shareholding and mining and extractive companies. The sample of the study consisted of (56) external auditors in (13) Jordanian mining and extractive corporations. The descriptive approach and analytical approach were also used for its occasion in achieving the objectives of the study. The data was processed statistically using arithmetic averages and multiple regression analysis.The study found a statistical impact of artificial intelligence on the development of external audit efficiency in Jordanian mining and extractive corporations, and the existence of a statistical impact of artificial intelligence, represented in: (Planning, carrying out control tests and basic tests of operations, carrying out analytical procedures and detailed tests of balances, auditing subsequent events and future commitments prior to the issuance of the auditor's report) in improving all dimensions of governance (effective governance framework, disclosure and transparency, shareholder equality, responsibilities of the Board of Directors, role of stakeholders) in mining companies and extraction companies in Jordanian Public Shareholding.In light of the results of the study, it recommended that the total reliance on artificial intelligence be made easier for auditors, which has a high positive impact.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccounting and Finance ResearchSame topicOrganizational and Employee PerformanceFrench-language works237,207