MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417074655 · doi:10.1111/1911-3838.70006

<scp>Financial Reporting &amp; Assurance Standards (FRAS)</scp> Canada Corner

2025· article· en· W4417074655 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting Perspectives · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCredit Risk and Financial Regulations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality assuranceGenerally Accepted Auditing Standards

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

FRAS Canada Corner is your quarterly update on the key discussions and decisions from Canada's reporting and assurance standard-setting boards: the Accounting Standards Board (AcSB), the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AASB), the Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB), and the Canadian Sustainability Standards Board (CSSB).Each update provides insights from recent board meetings, highlighting progress on proposed standards and active projects.Organized by date, these summaries include direct links to project pages and full details, ensuring you have access to the most up-to-date information at the time of publication.For deeper insights, explore our other resources at FRASC anada.ca.Le Bulletin de NIFC Canada propose une mise jour trimestrielle des principales discussions et dcisions des organismes canadiens responsables de l'tablissement des normes en matire d'information financire et de certification : le Conseil des normes comptables (CNC), le Conseil des normes d'audit et de certification (CNAC), le Conseil sur la comptabilit dans le secteur public (CCSP) et le Conseil canadien des normes de durabilit (CCND).Chaque mise jour offre un aperu des plus rcentes runions de ces conseils et met en lumire les progrs raliss sur les normes proposes et les projets en cours.Organiss par date, ces rsums contiennent des liens directs vers les pages des projets et l'information complte leur sujet, pour vous permettre d'accder l'information la plus jour au moment de la publication.Pour en apprendre davantage, explorez nos autres ressources l'adresse NIFCCanada.ca. | AcSB Decision SummariesJuly 15, 2025-The AcSB discussed agriculture; the Consultation Paper, "Detailed Review of Accounting Standards for Private Enterprises" (ASPE); financial statement concepts; the Part IV Work Plan Survey; IFRS Accounting Standards Discussion Group topics; and more.Read the decision summary for full details.September 16-17, 2025-The AcSB discussed rate-regulated activities; IFRS 16 Leases; reporting controlled and related entities for not-for-profits; agriculture; its annual plan and strategic plan; due process; and more.Read the decision summary for full details.

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)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.234 · 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.

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccounting PerspectivesSame topicCredit Risk and Financial RegulationsFrench-language works237,207