MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164855292 · doi:10.1109/icitst.2009.5402540

Privacy and trust policies within SOA

2009· article· en· W2164855292 on OpenAlexaff
David S. Allison, Hany F. El Yamany, Miriam A. M. Capretz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAccess Control and Trust
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsService-oriented architectureMetamodelingComputer scienceInformation privacyPrivacy by DesignPrivacy policyService providerArchitectureComputer securityService (business)Privacy softwareInternet privacyWeb serviceBusinessWorld Wide WebSoftware engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Privacy for Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) is required to gain the trust of those who would use the technology. Through the use of an independent privacy service (PS), the privacy policies of a service consumer and provider can be compared to create an agreed upon privacy contract. In this paper we further define a metamodel for privacy policy creation and comparison. A trust element is developed as an additional criterion for a privacy policy. We define the PS and what operations it must perform to accomplish its goals. We believe this PS combined with the presented metamodel provide a strong solution to providing privacy for SOA.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAccess Control and TrustFrench-language works237,207