MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999032182 · doi:10.4018/jdet.2003100101

Privacy and Security in E-Learning

2003· article· en· W1999032182 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 Distance Education Technologies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInternet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-voting
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrivacy by DesignComputer scienceInformation privacyInternet privacyVariety (cybernetics)Computer securityPrivacy softwarePrivacy policyCloud computing securityLegislationInformation securityCloud computingArtificial intelligenceLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For a variety of advantages, universities and other organizations are resorting to e-learning to provide instruction on-line. While many advances have been made in the mechanics of providing on-line instruction, the needs for privacy and security have to-date been largely ignored. This paper examines privacy and security issues associated with e-learning. It presents the basic principles behind privacy practices and legislation. It investigates the more popular e-learning standards to determine their provisions and limitations for privacy and security. Privacy requirements for e-learning systems are explored with respect to the “Privacy Principles.” The capabilities of a number of existing privacy enhancing technologies, including methods for network privacy, policy-based privacy/security management, and trust systems, are reviewed and assessed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.258 · 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