Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bridging the Semantic Gap in Continuous Auditing Knowledge Representation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Complex, Intelligent and Software Intensive Systems (CISIS 2021)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems ((LNNS,volume 278))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Due to its promised advantages, Continuous Auditing has become a research direction in the computer technology-assisted audit field. Unfortunately, auditors usually cannot thoroughly carry out the Continuous Auditing method because of their lack of Information Technology proficiency and inefficient communication as well as interaction with IT personnel and information system. Overcoming the “semantic gap” between heterogeneous information sources to facilitate an understanding of Continuous Auditing concept domain is a key challenge to support the Continuous Auditing implementation. The primary aim of this study is to bridge the “Semantic Gap” between auditors and information system in Continuous Auditing knowledge. It is necessary to narrow the semantic gap between high-level concepts employed by the auditor and low-level feature presentations of the system to create Continuous Auditing capacity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Dai, J., Vasarhelyi, M.A.: Toward blockchain-based accounting and assurance. J. Inf. Syst. 31(3), 5–21 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Hamscher, W.: Modeling accounting systems to support multiple tasks: a progress report. In: AAAI (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Rezaee, Z., et al.: Continuous auditing: building automated auditing capability1. In: Continuous Auditing. Emerald Publishing Limited (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Groomer, S.M., Murthy, U.S.: Continuous auditing of database applications: an embedded audit module approach. J. Inf. Syst. 3(2), 53–71 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Vasarhelyi, M.A., Halper, F.B.: The continuous audit of online systems. Auditing 10(1), 110–127 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chan, D.Y., Chiu, V., Vasarhelyi, M.A.: Continuous Auditing: Theory and Application. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Chen, W., Zhang, J.-C., Jiang, Y.-Q.: One continuous auditing practice in china: data-oriented online auditing (DOOA). In: Wang, W., Li, Y., Duan, Z., Yan, L., Li, H., Yang, X. (eds.) I3E 2007. IIFIP, vol. 252, pp. 521–528. Springer, Boston, MA (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-75494-9_63

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Alles, M.G., Kogan, A., Vasarhelyi, A.M.: Putting continuous auditing theory into practice: lessons from two pilot implementations. J. Inf. Syst. 22(2), 195–214 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chien-Ho, W., et al.: On an agent-based architecture for collaborative continuous auditing. In: 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design, 2008. CSCWD 2008 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  10. El-Hussein, E.E.-M., Jacqueline, L.R.: Continuous online auditing as a response to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Manag. Audit. J. 23(8), 779–802 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chi-Chun, C., Chang, C.J.: Continuous auditing for web-released financial information. Rev. Acc. Financ. 9(1), 4–32 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kuhn, J.R., Sutton, S.G.: Continuous auditing in ERP system environments: the current state and future directions. J. Inf. Syst. 24(1), 91–112 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Michael, M., Mike, S.: Sharing Ledgers for Sharing Economies: An Exploration of Mutual Distributed Ledgers (aka Blockchain Technology), E.Y. (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Baksa, R.: Continuous Auditing as a Foundation for Real Time Decision Support: Implementation Challenges and Successes Supporting Real Time Decision-Making. vol. 13, p. 237 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  15. AICPA and CICA: Generally Accepted Privacy Principles (2009). www.aicpa.org

  16. Kiesow, A., Schomaker, T., Thomas, O.: Transferring continuous auditing to the digital age-the knowledge base after three decades of research. In: ECIS 2016 Proceedings (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Chan, D.Y., Vasarhelyi, A.M.: Innovation and practice of continuous auditing. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 12(2), 152–160 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Malaescu, I., Sutton, S.G.: The reliance of external auditors on internal audit’s use of continuous audit. J. Inf. Syst. 29(1), 95–114 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Chien-Chih, Y., Hung-Chao, Y., Chi-Chun, C.: The impacts of electronic commerce on auditing practices: an auditing process model for evidence collection and validation. Int. J. Intell. Syst. Account. Finance Manage. 9(3), 195–216 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kogan, A.: Continuous online auditing: a program of research. J. Inf. Syst. 13(2), 87–103 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Mainardi, R.L.: Harnessing the Power of Continuous Auditing: Developing and Implementing a Practical Methodology. John Wiley & Sons Inc., Canada (2011)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  22. Eulerich, M., Georgi, C., Schmidt, A.: Continuous auditing and risk-based audit planning—an empirical analysis. J. Emerg. Technol. Account. 17(2), 141–155 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Cao, M., Chychyla, R., Stewart, T.: Big Data analytics in financial statement audits. Account. Horiz. 29(2), 423–429 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Chen, H.-H., et al.: The development and performance evaluation of a continuous auditing assistance system. Int. J. Electr. Finance 1(4), 460–472 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Weigand, H., Elsas, P.: Model-based auditing using REA. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 13(3), 287–310 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Xu, Z., Lee, Y.: Semantic heterogeneity of geodata. Int. Arch. Photogram. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci. 34(4), 216–224 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hecker, M.: A generic privacy ontology and its applications to different domains. In: DEBII, p. 174. Curtin University, Perth (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hecker, M.: Privacy ontology support for E-commerce. IEEE Internet Comput. 12(2), 54–61 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Brusa, G., Caliusco, M.L., Chotti, O.: A process for building domain ontology: an experience in developing a government budgetary ontology. In: Australian Ontology Workshop, pp. 7–15. Australian Computer Society Inc, Hobart, Australia (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Patrut, B.: Accounting knowledge representation in PROLOG language. BRAND. Broad Res. Account. Negotiation Distrib. 1(1), 11–18 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Garcia, D., et al.: Towards a base ontology for privacy protection in service-oriented architecture. In: 2009 IEEE International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing and Applications (SOCA) (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Chandrasekaran, B., Josephson, J.R., Benjamins, V.R.: What are ontologies, and why do we need them? Intell. Syst. Appl. IEEE 14(1), 20–26 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Teller, P.: The use of a formal representation of accounting standards. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Appl. 5(3b), 93–116 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Min, C., Chychyla, R., Stewart, T.: Big data analytics in financial statement audits. Account. Horiz. 29(2), 423–429 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Aparaschivei, F.: The importance of an accounting ontology. Econ. Inf. 1(4), 5–10 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Gyrard, A., Serrano, M., Atemezing, G.A.: Semantic web methodologies, best practices and ontology engineering applied to Internet of Things. In: 2015 IEEE 2nd World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT). IEEE (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Lupaşc, A., Lupaşc, I., Negoescu, G.: The role of ontologies for designing accounting information systems. Econ. Appl. Inf. 1(1), 101–108 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Chien-Ho, W., et al.: On an agent-based architecture for collaborative continuous auditing. In: Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design, 2008. CSCWD 2008 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Akinyemi, J.A. Ehikioya, S.A.: An ontology and knowledge representation of financial audit system. In: IASTED International Conference. Acta Press, Virgin Islands, USA (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Subhani, N. and R.D. Kent. Continuous process auditing (CPA): an audit rule ontology based approach to audit-as-a-service. in Systems Conference (SysCon). 2015 9th Annual IEEE International. IEEE (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Gómez-Pérez, A., Fernández-López, M., Corcho, O.: Ontological engineering: with examples from the areas of knowledge management, e-commerce and the semantic Web In: Wu, X., Ain, L.J. (eds.) Springer, London (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/b97353

  42. Sattar, A., et al.: Comparative Analysis of Methodologies for Domain Ontology Development: A Systematic Review (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Galliers, R.: Choosing Information system Research Approaches: Issues, Method, adn Practical Guideline. Blackwell Scientific (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kohn, M.M.: Lipoprotein ontology: a formal representation of Lipoproteins. In: Curtin University, School of Information Systems (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Jinsoo, P., Kimoon, S., Sewon, M.: Developing graduation screen ontology based on the methontology approach. In: Fourth International Conference on Networked Computing and Advanced Information Management, 2008. NCM‘08 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Klein, H.: A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. Manag. Inf. Syst. Q. 23(1), 67–84 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Dubé, L., Paré, G.: Case Research Information System: Current Practice, Trends, and Recommendations. Cahier du GReSI, pp. 01–02 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Chen, S.: Continuous auditing: risk, challenges and opportunities. Int. J. Appl. Manage. Technol. 1(1), 77–86 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Corcho, O., Fernandez-Lopez, M., Gomez-Perez, A.: Ontological engineering: what are ontologies and how can we build them? (2007)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universitas Islam Sultan Agung, Jalan Raya Kaligawe KM 4, Semarang, Indonesia

    Sri Sulistyowati, Indri Kartika, Imam Setijawan & Maya Indriastuti

Authors
  1. Sri Sulistyowati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Indri Kartika
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Imam Setijawan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maya Indriastuti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sri Sulistyowati .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information and Communication Engineering, Fukuoka Institute of Technology, Fukuoka, Japan

    Leonard Barolli

  2. Department of Information Security Engineering, Soonchunhyang University, Asan, Korea (Republic of)

    Kangbin Yim

  3. Faculty of Bussiness Administration, Rissho University, Tokyo, Japan

    Tomoya Enokido

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Sulistyowati, S., Kartika, I., Setijawan, I., Indriastuti, M. (2021). Bridging the Semantic Gap in Continuous Auditing Knowledge Representation. In: Barolli, L., Yim, K., Enokido, T. (eds) Complex, Intelligent and Software Intensive Systems. CISIS 2021. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 278. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79725-6_54

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation