Bibliographic record
Abstract
An open society is a cherished liberal ideal, but one necessarily limited by a need for privacy. When Louis Brandeis first formulated "the right to privacy" in 1890, it was in response to advances in the technology of photography and the growth of the tabloid press. Today once again new technologies threaten privacy. Real concerns exist about the security of digital data, especially as it affects our personal identity. Furthermore, the development of Web 2.0 and the growth of social media allow ordinary people to collaborate and share information on an unprecedented scale. On the positive side, these digital technologies have given rise to citizen journalism that calls authority to account. At the same time our media-saturated climate has created a "panoptic" society, and encouraged a penchant for validation through self-exposure. This culture of hypervisibility in confluence with a generation that has grown up "digitally native" reveals the paradoxes of living life in the open. Une société ouverte est un idéal libéral précieux, mais qui est nécessairement limité par le besoin du respect de la vie privée. Lorsque Louis Brandeis a formulé pour la première fois "le droit à la vie privée" en 1890, c’était en réponse aux progrès de la technologie de la photographie et à la croissance de la presse populaire. Aujourd’hui, encore une fois, les nouvelles technologies menacent la vie privée. Des préoccupations réelles existent au sujet de la sécurité des données numériques, en particulier, lorsqu’elles touchent notre identité personnelle. De plus, le développement du Web 2.0 et la poussée des médias sociaux permettent aux gens ordinaires de collaborer et de partager de l’information d’une ampleur sans précédent. D’un côté positif, ces technologies numériques ont donné lieu au journalisme des citoyens qui exige des autorités qu’elles rendent des comptes. Par la même occasion, notre climat saturé par les médias a créé une société "panoptique," et encouragé un penchant vers la validation par l’auto-exposition. Cette culture d’hypervisibilité, confluant avec une génération "native du numérique," révèle les paradoxes de la vie dévoilée au grand jour.
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.031 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.023 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.009 |
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".