MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023463827 · doi:10.1142/s0218194003001317

Adding Flexibility in Information Flow Control for Object-Oriented Systems Using Versions

2003· article· en· W2023463827 on OpenAlexaff
Allaoua Maamir, Abdelaziz Fellah

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity and Verification in Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInformation flowFlexibility (engineering)Object (grammar)Process (computing)Distributed computingBlocking (statistics)ConfidentialityControl (management)EnforcementCloning (programming)Computer securityComputer networkProgramming languageArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the main features of information flow control is to ensure the enforcement of privacy and regulated accessibility. However, most information flow models that have been proposed do not provide substantial assurance to enforce end-to-end confidentiality policies or they are too restrictive, overprotected, and inflexible. This paper presents an approach to control flow information in object-oriented systems using versions, thus allowing considerable flexibility without compromising system security by leaking sensitive information. Models based on message filtering intercept every message exchanged among objects to control the flow of information. Versions are proposed to provide flexibility and avoid unnecessary and undesirable blocking of messages during the filtering process. Two options of operations are supported by versions — cloning reply and non-cloning reply. Furthermore, we present an algorithm which enforces message filtering through these operations.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.018
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations14
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge EngineeringSame topicSecurity and Verification in ComputingFrench-language works237,207