{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020489094514210177, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0013218770654329147, 'mean_word_length': 5.204918032786885, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Accuracy Of Exchange Valuation Rules

Various approaches to valuation have often been regarded as empirical proxies for a common, unobservable, theoretical construct of value.1 From this viewpoint, the main objective of research in valuation is to determine how well each method approximates the underlying value. There is no unique measure of how "good" a proxy is, and several attributes such as relevance to decisions, objectivity, freedom from bias, and cost have been examined in the accounting literature. Most analyses have been centered on historical cost, general price level, current valuation, and their variations. Since little attention has been paid to the underlying analytical structure of the abovementioned valuation rules, a rigorous comparative study of their attributes has not been possible. The purpose of the present study is to introduce a new approach to the comparative analysis of valuation systems. This is accomplished in three steps. In Section 1, a general scheme for algebraic representation of a family of valuation rules, called the "exchange valuation set" is presented. Historical cost, general purchasing power, and current valuation rules are seen to be three of the large number of members that belong to this family. Study of valuation rules by means of this structure offers two distinct advantages. First, it facilitates an analysis of the differences between valuation rules in quantitative rather than merely qualitative terms. The choice of a valuation rule is not so