MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120025634 · doi:10.1109/cive.2009.4926313

An intelligent agent-based framework for privacy payoff negotiation in virtual environments

2009· article· en· W2120025634 on OpenAlexaff
Abdulsalam Yassine, Shervin Shirmohammadi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationEntitlement (fair division)Computer scienceStochastic gameIntelligent agentFocus (optics)Virtual machineMulti-agent systemComputer securityHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the rapid development of applications in open distributed virtual environments, such as e-Business and virtual games, privacy is becoming a critical issue. This paper presents an intelligent agent-based framework for privacy payoff in virtual environments, with special focus on capability-based negotiation services. These services take into consideration users' entitlement to benefit from revealing their personal information. In such model, users of the virtual environment who share same interests have the opportunity to form personal information lists that can be used later for group bargaining. The intelligent negotiation agent acts on their behalf to maximize their benefit. The overall framework is described, and a particular example is presented to show the interaction among the agents.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPrivacy, Security, and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207