MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982080834 · doi:10.1177/0894439305278890

Security, Sovereignty and Continental Interoperability

2005· article· en· W1982080834 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Science Computer Review · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecrecyTransparency (behavior)InteroperabilityNexus (standard)AccountabilitySovereigntyPublic administrationCorporate governancePolitical scienceComputer securityPublic relationsBusinessLawPoliticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an era of digital government, citizen-centric governance is a central aim—one that is often predicated on more efficient and responsive service owed through digital connectivity. Antiterrorism efforts accentuate this focus, albeit with a very different set of aims. Governments have been quick to establish new antiterrorism and homeland security measures that create new and expanded capacities for gathering, analyzing, and sharing information. In doing so, tensions have arisen with respect to the appropriate scope of governmental action, and the proper mix of secrecy and transparency. Such tensions also extend beyond borders, as North American governance faces new and rising pressures to adapt to a post–September 11, 2001, nexus of security, technology, and democracy. This article argues that the culture of secrecy already prevalent within security authorities is being extended to continentally under the guise of interoperability without sufficient effort to ensure openness and public accountability within and between countries.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.013
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations6
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Science Computer ReviewSame topicCybersecurity and Cyber Warfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207