Financial report of the ECSC in liquidation at 31 December 2010. Commission staff working document accompanying the report. SEC (2011) 768 final, 22 June 2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A. General information B. Summary of significant accounting policies C. Financial Risk Management D. Explanatory notes to the balance sheet E. Explanatory notes to the income statement F. Off balance sheet G. Related party disclosures H. Events after the balance sheet date An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates made by DG ECFIN's Management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements.We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion. OpinionIn our opinion, except for the matter noted above, the financial statements of ECSC in liquidation as of December 31, 2010, have been prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with the accounting rules applicable to the European Communities set out in note B.Without qualifying our opinion, we emphasize that the accounting policies used and disclosures made are not intended to, and do not, comply with all the requirements of the International Financial Reporting Standards.For Deloitte S.A., Cabinet de révision agréé Martin Flaunet, Réviseur d'entreprises agréé Partner
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.108 | 0.051 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".