MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1562100969

Getting Under Your Skin--Literally: RFID in the Employment Context

2007· article· en· W1562100969 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marisa Anne Pagnattaro

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Law and Ethics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadio-frequency identificationContext (archaeology)ClothingIdentification (biology)Computer securityBusinessInternet privacyEuropean unionEngineeringPolitical scienceComputer scienceLawInternational trade
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the legal ramifications of the use of radio frequency identification chips (“RFID”) by employers. RFID is an automated data-capture technology that can be used to identify, track and store information contained on a tiny computer chip, which uses electromagnetic energy in the form of radio waves to communicate information. These chips can be implanted under an employee’s skin, worn in an employee’s clothing or in an identification badge. Part II presents a brief history of RFID, as well as novel and interesting uses in the workplace. This section also discusses security and safety concerns regarding the use of this technology. Part III analyzes current and proposed law in the United States regulating RFID, and privacy implications. Part IV details legal regulations in the international context, including in Canada, the European Union and Australia. Lastly, in Part V, recommendations about the use and legal regulation of RFID in the workplace are proposed.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.028
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0110.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicBusiness Law and EthicsFrench-language works237,207