MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154524064 · doi:10.1109/compsac.2009.156

A Model for Privacy Policy Visualization

2009· article· en· W2154524064 on OpenAlex
Kambiz Ghazinour, Maryam Majedi, Ken Barker

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
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrivacy policyPrivacy by DesignInformation privacyPrivacy softwareInternet privacyVisualizationComputer scienceThe InternetData publishingLegislaturePrivacy lawKey (lock)PublishingComputer securityWorld Wide WebPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Privacy is a leading concern for anyone that utilizes computing resources whether shopping on the Internet or visiting their doctor. Legislative acts require enterprises and data collectors to protect the privacy of their customers and data owners. Although privacy policy frameworks such as P3P assist data collectors in demonstrating their privacy policies to customers (i.e. publishing privacy policy on Web sites), insufficient research has been reported to help users visualize privacy policies. This paper presents a privacy policy visualization model based on the predicates of a privacy policy model. The key contribution is to provide a visualization model that facilitates understanding the policies for the data owners and provides the opportunity for the policy officers to better understand the designed policies. Finally, we demonstrate the model with a use case drawn from the policies of an online social network.

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)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Open science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.526
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0170.016
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations38
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207