MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2345199062

E-Banking Security Issues â Is There A Solution inBiometrics?

2011· article· en· W2345199062 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amtul Fatima

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer securityComputer scienceThe InternetInteroperabilityAuthentication (law)Identification (biology)Internet privacyBiometricsService providerDatabase transactionScalabilitySecurity serviceInformation securityService (business)BusinessWorld Wide WebDatabaseMarketing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The providers of Internet banking services must be more responsive towards security requirements. While there is no doubt that Internet banking transaction should have layered protection against security threats, the providers should approach security considerations as part of their service offerings. Biometric based authentication and identification systems are the new solutions to address the issues of security and privacy. Using biometrics for identification restrict individuals from access to physical spaces and electronic services An effective authentication method should have customer acceptance, reliable performance, scalability to accommodate growth, and interoperability with existing systems and future plans. In this study, the security threats in Internet banking, its solutions in biometrics and its acceptance in the consumer market are studied using descriptive and exploratory research. The methods of descriptive research are used to obtain information concerning the major security issues in e-Banking. The research had been completed on the basis of secondary data (online databases, scientific journals, surveys, news).

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score0.523

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Internet Banking and CommerceSame topicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital FinanceFrench-language works237,207