MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146211415 · doi:10.5430/wjss.v1n1p37

Privacy in the Age of Big Data: Exploring the Role of Modern Identity Management Systems

2013· article· en· W2146211415 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ali M. Al-Khouri

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Social Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicBig Data Technologies and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork University
KeywordsIdentity managementBig dataIdentity (music)Digital identityGovernment (linguistics)Internet privacyInformation privacyIdentity theftData managementBusinessData securityData Protection Act 1998Data scienceComputer securityComputer scienceAuthentication (law)Access control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In today’s digital world, our ability to better understand data is seen as fundamental to addressing complex economical and societal challenges. The massive amounts of digital data that governments and businesses collect as well as the technological tools they use for analyzing disparate data are referred to as big data. These advances in data collection and analysis have raised concerns about individuals' rights to privacy. In this article, we attempt to provide a short overview of big data and explore the role of modern identity management systems in providing higher levels of security and privacy in online environments. The article also makes reference to one of the most advanced identity management systems in the world, namely the United Arab Emirates’ (UAE) identity management infrastructure, and how the government has designed its systems to support privacy and security in e-government and e-commerce scenarios .

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)0.012
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.013
Scholarly communication0.0130.029
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.361
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.031 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Social ScienceSame topicBig Data Technologies and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207