Bibliographic record
Abstract
This talk will review the emerging research in Terrorism Informatics based on a web mining perspective. Recent progress in the internationally renowned Dark Web project will be reviewed, including: deep/dark web spidering (web sites, forums, Youtube, virtual worlds), web metrics analysis, dark network analysis, web-based authorship analysis, and sentiment and affect analysis for terrorism tracking. In collaboration with selected international terrorism research centers and intelligence agencies, the Dark Web project has generated one of the largest databases in the world about extremist/terrorist-generated Internet contents (web sites, forums, blogs, and multimedia documents). Dark Web research has received significant international press coverage, including: Associated Press, USA Today, The Economist, NSF Press, Washington Post, Fox News, BBC, PBS, Business Week, Discover magazine, WIRED magazine, Government Computing Week, Second German TV (ZDF), Toronto Star, and Arizona Daily Star, among others. Recent Dark Web research includes: (1) epidemiological and social network modeling of internet radicalization and violent intents; (2) Dark Web Forum Portal and Video Portal for researchers and analysts; and (3) Geopolitical Web research of social media and news tracking for multi-cultural at-risk regions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".