Bibliographic record
Abstract
Governments around the Western world are becoming increasingly concerned about cyber security. This paper uses the Hood et al. Risk Regulation Regime (2001) framework to describe Public Safety Canada's Cyber Security Strategy and analyze the social and economic pressures that will influence the manner in which the strategy will be operationalized. This paper recommends that government: takes a balanced approach to securing its own systems, recognizing the costs of an overly precautionary stance; continues to work and exchange information on cyber security with owners and operators of critical infrastructure while at the same time recognizing the market context in which they operate, which constrains this exchange; and helps Canadians to be secure online with enhanced public education programs that have a longer-term view and recognize people's desire for flexibility and convenience in the technology they use. The research in this paper is drawn from academic literature, media analysis and semi-structured interviews.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".