MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160936886 · doi:10.1109/tpc.2004.828207

Multinational Data-Privacy Laws: An Introductionfor IT Managers

2004· article· en· W2160936886 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elizabeth R. Perkins, Mike Markel

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Professional Communication · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation privacy lawData Protection Act 1998Multinational corporationInformation privacyAgency (philosophy)LegislationFTC Fair Information PracticeEuropean unionBusinessPrivacy lawPersonally identifiable informationGovernment (linguistics)Data Protection DirectivePrivacy laws of the United StatesPrivacy policyUnited States National Security AgencyFreedom of informationData breachPrivacy by DesignInternet privacyLawPolitical scienceEuropean Union lawInternational tradeNational security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information-technology managers at United States companies are likely to be affected by recent legislation in the European Union and in Canada that restricts the transfer of citizens' personal information to countries that do not protect that information adequately. We argue that, from both ethical and pragmatic perspectives, USA businesses should reject the voluntary, self-certifying approach to data protection currently in favor in the United States. USA businesses should advocate instead for a European approach that mandates stronger data protection and establishes a government agency charged with enforcing it. If the USA adopted a European approach to data privacy, USA businesses would attract more customers and avoid the legal problems that are likely to result when European and Canadian data-privacy authorities begin to enforce their new laws vigorously.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.011
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0090.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Professional CommunicationSame topicPrivacy, Security, and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207