MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978879337 · doi:10.1109/comswa.2007.382559

Role Based Access Control for UDDI Inquiries

2007· article· en· W1978879337 on OpenAlexaff
Raymond Peterkin, Jinsuk Solomon, Dan Ionescu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAccess Control and Trust
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeb serviceWorld Wide WebPublicationComputer scienceAccess controlControl (management)WS-I Basic ProfileLimit (mathematics)BusinessKnowledge managementComputer securityWeb developmentWeb application security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Web services are commonly used by organizations for B2B integration and enterprise application integration. UDDI registries are widely used as mechanisms for businesses to list and discover available services. Businesses may want to limit the information of their services to certain users and businesses. However, UDDI provides no mechanisms to limit data inquiries to a particular subset of requesters. This paper presents a role-based access control implementation of UDDI so businesses may safely publish data and limit the organizations who may perform inquiries against their information.

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)0.072
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.106
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 score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0720.106
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0190.015
Open science0.0080.012
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.342 · 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

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAccess Control and TrustFrench-language works237,207