MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1519212770 · doi:10.24908/ss.v10i2.4094

Surveillance Studies and Violence Against Women

2012· article· en· W1519212770 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSurveillance & Society · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicStalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriminalizationComputer securityCriminologyElectronic surveillanceInternet privacyEmerging technologiesPolitical scienceSociologyPublic relationsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surveillance, privacy and security are of paramount concern to technology users. One of the implications of these new forms of technologized surveillance that has received little attention is their implications for women fleeing violent situations. This article seeks to place questions of surveillance technologies into a theoretical framework that foregrounds the challenges that new surveillance technologies pose to anti-violence movements. Specifically we address the impact of surveillance technologies in the practice of violence and some proposed solutions, and consider the ways that surveillance technologies are used disproportionately in the criminalization marginalized groups. By placing violence against women at the center of our analysis we aim to complicate concerns related to surveillance technologies.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.290
Threshold uncertainty score0.951

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.295 · 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