MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123976074 · doi:10.1109/mcetech.2008.26

Anonymous Credentials for Privacy-Preserving E-learning

2008· article· en· W2123976074 on OpenAlexaff
A Esma, Hicham Hage, Flavien Serge Mani Onana

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalComputer Research Institute of Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInternet privacyComputer securityContext (archaeology)Process (computing)Set (abstract data type)Information privacyOrder (exchange)Business

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

E-learning systems have made considerable progress within the last few years. Nonetheless, the issue of learner privacy has been practically ignored. Existing E-learning standards offer some provisions for privacy and the security of E-learning systems offers some privacy protection, but remains unsatisfactory on several levels. On the other hand, privacy preserving solutions that are appropriate and used in E-commerce environments are inadequate and unsuitable to the context of E-learning. Indeed, while in most E-commerce applications different transactions between the client and the system are pretty much independent, in E-learning the interactions between the learner and system are intertwined into a developing process that depends heavily on the path the leaner is following. In this paper, we introduce the Anonymous Credentials for E-learning Systems (ACES), a set of protocols to preserve learner’s privacy in E-learning environments. In particular, the ACES allows learners to provide anonymous credentials throughout the learning process, such as when they need to prove that they possess the necessary requirements to register for a course, and/or to prove that they are the legitimate owners of an Anonymous Transcript or an Anonymous Degree. Although the concept of anonymous credentials is not novel, ACES takes into account the specificities of E-learning. Moreover, in order to prevent the misuse of privacy, ACES prevents the possibility of sharing credentials between learners.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.012
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations23
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryptography and Data SecurityFrench-language works237,207