MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114542697 · doi:10.1109/icdsp.2009.5201080

On supporting anonymity in a BAN biometric framework

2009· article· en· W2114542697 on OpenAlexaff
Foteini Agrafioti, Francis M. Bui, Dimitrios Hatzinakos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnonymityComputer scienceBiometricsComputer securityPrivate information retrievalFingerprint (computing)Internet privacyService providerPersonally identifiable informationWorld Wide WebService (business)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The flourishing technology of physiological biometrics, particularly those related to medical information, has raised concerns about the intrusion to individuals' private information. This paper proposes a novel biometric framework for managing sensitive information. A privacy oriented body area network (BAN), with electrocardiogram (ECG) based recognition, is presented for supporting anonymity. In this framework, service providers are equipped with the possibility of pervasive subject monitoring, potentially eliminating the need for authenticated identities, while offering an automatic way of managing personal information. To this end, the central node of each BAN is designed to handle both the communication with external resources, and the processing of ECG personalized signatures destined to identify an individual. Sensitive information reaches the server with anonymity guarantees, to be stored automatically in the associated file.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.011
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUser Authentication and Security SystemsFrench-language works237,207