MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115762815 · doi:10.1109/ism.2006.1

A Criterion-Based Role-Based Multilayer Access Control Model for Multimedia Applications

2006· article· en· W2115762815 on OpenAlexaff
Leon Pan, Chang N. Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAccess Control and Trust
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRole-based access controlAccess controlObject (grammar)Simple (philosophy)Extension (predicate logic)Computer security modelControl (management)Information securityComputer securityArtificial intelligenceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a criterion-based role-based multilayer access control model in which a number of security criterion expressions are embedded into every object to specify the security attributes of its sub objects. Meanwhile, a security criterion subset is combined with each operation to reflect the relevant keys of the embedded security criterion expressions in the corresponding object, and another security criterion subset is associated with each user to specify the user's security features. The desired multilayer access control is achieved by evaluating the embedded security criterion expressions by using the common elements of the security criterion subsets associated with the related operation and the related user. The proposed model, which is an extension of traditional role-based access control (REAC) model, efficiently supports both the multilayer access control and non-multilayer access control. In addition to the advantages of traditional RBAC, the model is simple in logic and efficient in performance

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.784

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAccess Control and TrustFrench-language works237,207