Relationships Between Relevant Contextual Influences and Information Security Threats and Controls in Global Financial Services Industry
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Businesses operating in the Global Financial Services Industry (GFSI) know the importance of protecting information assets from ever-growing security threats and risks. This paper aims at shedding light on the relationships between four relevant contextual factors i.e. national legal infrastructure, transparency levels, ethical behavior of firms, and capacity for innovation, on the one hand, and information security threats and controls, on the other. To some extent, this study enriches the information provided in the 2012 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited (DTTL) survey. This study’s findings indicated that contextual factors such as national transparency levels and ethical behavior of firms do have positive associations with, and effects on some information security threats and controls. Information provided in this study is beneficial to both practitioners and academicians.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it