MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098451448

STATUTORY OR REGULATORY GUIDANCE SHOULD BE IGNORED BUT REFERENCE SHOULD BE MADE TO ICAA’S RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT. IT IS THE UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES OF THE ARTICLES THAT ARE RELEVANT AND WHICH CAN BE USED AS MEANINGFUL GUIDANCE IN THE PRACTICE OF PUBL

2006· article· en· W7098451448 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Theology, History, Judaism, Christianity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditStatutory lawChief audit executiveExternal auditorPublic interest
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An Accountancy magazine article viewed as being relevant to Canadian public accounting has been identified. The complete article can be accessed on the ICAA website www.icaa.ab.ca/media/news_briefs.shtml From The Chartered Accountants Journal – New Zealand (NZ) Institute of Chartered Accountants- June, 2006 edition- To audit or not to audit Experienced practitioner Tracey Grant provides practical guidance regarding the pros and cons of audits for not-for-profit organizations, and the pitfalls for members.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.161
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.161
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0140.020
Scholarly communication0.0230.010
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0260.033
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.061

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 head0.217
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReligion, Theology, History, Judaism, ChristianityFrench-language works237,207