MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995412001 · doi:10.4018/jsse.2010040102

Towards Designing E-Services that Protect Privacy

2010· article· en· W1995412001 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

VenueInternational Journal of Secure Software Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePrivacy by DesignPersonally identifiable informationDimension (graph theory)Computer securityService (business)Internet privacyUnified Modeling LanguageRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessSoftwareMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growth of electronic services (e-services) has resulted in large amounts of personal information in the hands of service organizations like banks, insurance companies, and online retailers. This has led to the realization that such information must be protected, not only to comply with privacy regulations but also and more importantly, to attract clients. One important dimension of this goal is to design e-services that protect privacy. In this paper, the author proposes a design approach that incorporates privacy risk analysis of UML diagrams to minimize privacy risks in the final design. The approach iterates between the risk analysis and design modifications to eliminate the risks until a design is obtained that is close to being risk free.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.265 · 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