MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W14113628

Canada's Restricted Area Identification Card Program

2007· article· en· W14113628 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rob Durward

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational airport review · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAir Traffic Management and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiometricsComputer securityIdentification (biology)Smart cardIris recognitionAccess controlHand geometryComputer scienceClass (philosophy)Engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to assume a more direct role in Canadian aviation security, the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority (CATSA) was created as a Crown Corporation in April 2002. Preventing unauthorized individuals from accessing restricted airport areas, such as baggage ramps, refueling stations, and maintenance hangers, through the development of a secure biometric enrollment and identity verification program was one aspect of this new security role. The author discusses how CATSA partnered with Transport Canada to develop a Restricted Area Identification Card (RAIC) in 2004 to replace the Restricted Area Pass in use prior to CATSA's formation. The RAIC system and software incorporates biometric technology (identification through iris and fingerprints) to validate non-passenger identities for restricted area access. A centralized database is also used for real-time identity access management tracking in regard to RAIC card cancellation, verification, and issuance. Additional security measure information used in conjunction with the RAIC system, including differences in Class 1 and Class 2 airports, number of access points, and use of mantraps, is discussed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.003

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational airport reviewSame topicAir Traffic Management and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207