MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168687785

Принцип тайного голосования при использовании современных информационных технологий

2014· article· ru· W2168687785 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
K. Yu. Matryonina, К. Ю. Матренина

Bibliographic record

VenueВестник Тюменского государственного университета. Социально-экономические и правовые исследования · 2014
Typearticle
Languageru
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal and Policy Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuffrageVotingPolitical scienceBallotSecrecyLegislationElectronic votingSecret ballotLaw and economicsLawDisapproval votingDialecticComputer securityComputer scienceSociologyPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Election is the most important tool in democratic decision making. The provision of secrecy of the ballot is the biggest problem of electronic voting. The research goal is a detailed consideration of the principle of secret suffrage of electronic voting, research of rules of secret voting. The general research methods used were as follows: comparative legal research, induction and deduction, synthesis and analysis, dialectical research. The article considers the international legislation in tha area of secret suffrage (for example, Code of good practice in electoral matters). Moreover, the possible violations of secret voting are analyzed. There is a review of recent achievements in the area of defense of secret suffrage in foreign countries (Switzerland, Canada). The author proposes the protective means for secret voter’s will provision. The article concludes that further development of e-voting systems is imperative, as is the elaboration and the improvement of protective mechanism of secret suffrage.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.625
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.005
Bibliometrics0.0040.012
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0120.004
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.050

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.323 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueВестник Тюменского государственного университета. Социально-экономические и правовые исследованияSame topicLegal and Policy IssuesFrench-language works237,207