MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063875363 · doi:10.1145/967030.967031

Fighting the spam wars

2004· article· en· W2063875363 on OpenAlexaff
Paweł Gburzyński, Jacek Maitan

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Internet Technology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpam and Phishing Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Simple (philosophy)SoftwarePopulationAliasWorld Wide WebComputer securityOperating systemDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an effective method of eliminating unsolicited electronic mail (so-called spam ) and discuss its publicly accessible prototype implementation. A subscriber to our system is able to obtain an unlimited number of aliases of his/her permanent (protected) E-Mail address to be handed out to parties willing to communicate with the subscriber. It is also possible to set up publishable aliases, which can be used by human correspondents to contact the subscriber, while being useless to harvesting robots and spammers. The validity of an alias can be easily restricted to a specific duration in time, a specific number of received messages, a specific population of senders, and/or in other ways. The system is fully compatible with the existing E-Mail infrastructure and can be immediately accessed via any standard E-Mail client software (MUA). It can be easily deployed at any institution or organization running its private E-Mail server (MTA) with a trivial modification to that server. Our system offers a simple method to salvage the existing population of E-Mail addresses while eliminating all spam aimed at them.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.011

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations23
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Internet TechnologySame topicSpam and Phishing DetectionFrench-language works237,207