MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2340178270 · doi:10.1057/9781137406194_9

Privacy Concerns Regarding the Use of Data

2014· book-chapter· en· W2340178270 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Richard Boire

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan US eBooks · 2014
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationInternet privacyBusinessPersonally identifiable informationFTC Fair Information PracticeData Protection Act 1998Privacy policyInformation privacyConsumer privacyPublic relationsBest practicePrivacy lawPolitical scienceLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Privacy is a topic where people will have strong opinions. In Canada, much of this opinion has been formulated into many of the principles and guidelines outlined in PIPEDA (Personal Information Protection and Electronics Document Act). The legislation in many cases is very clear on what marketers and data miners can and cannot do. But there are some grey areas when terms such as reasonableness are used. For the most part, marketers and data miners respect the legislation since it encapsulates what has been best practice in many organizations for many years. It is simply a good business practice to be respectful of and attentive to the privacy needs of consumers when attempting to properly market the right services and products to them.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.186 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venuePalgrave Macmillan US eBooksSame topicPrivacy, Security, and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207