MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2275702459 · doi:10.3917/ecofi.120.0181

Institutions financières et cybercriminalité

2016· article· fr· W2275702459 on OpenAlexaff
Édouard Fernandez-Bollo

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d économie financière · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsCanadian Association of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Si les cyberattaques n’ont eu jusqu’à présent qu’une incidence limitée sur le secteur financier français, elles représentent néanmoins une menace sérieuse pour les établissements bancaires et les organismes d’assurance en termes de sécurité des systèmes d’information, de continuité d’activité et de protection des données. L’émergence de ces nouveaux risques suscite une attention élevée de la part des superviseurs. La réglementation sur le contrôle interne et sur la gestion du risque opérationnel constitue le socle des dispositifs de prévention mis en place, qui doivent s’accompagner du développement d’une veille proactive permettant de repérer l’évolution des menaces et de définir les moyens de se protéger. Les axes de progrès prioritaires identifiés par l’ACPR (Autorité de contrôle prudentiel et de résolution) concernent la gestion des droits d’accès et les outils de détection des intrusions dans le système d’information. La coopération entre tous les acteurs, publics et privés, apparaît en outre primordiale, tant pour mener des exercices de place et tester la robustesse des entreprises que pour améliorer l’identification des menaces par des échanges d’informations accrus. L’action du superviseur doit enfin s’inscrire dans un cadre européen et international afin de garantir la coordination des initiatives. Classification JEL : G21, G28.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.120
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d économie financièreSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207