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 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

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.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.557
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.016
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

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUser Authentication and Security SystemsFrench-language works237,207