MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2400566687

The USA Patriot Act and Internet Surveillance

2006· article· en· W2400566687 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maren Wells

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarsArchive (Brigham Young University) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe InternetLaw enforcementHollywoodInternet accessAdvertisingCashLawBusinessInternet privacyPolitical scienceComputer scienceHistoryWorld Wide WebFinanceArt history
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Paul Dragomir, manager of the Longshore Motel in Hollywood, Florida, reponed that in late August of 2001 two men, now believed to be September II hijackers Atta and Ziad Samir, came to his motel and requested a room with 24-hour Internet access. According to Dragomir, these men claimed they were computer engineers from Iran and chat they had come from Canada co find jobs. Dragomir put these two men in a hotel room without Internet access while he tried to locate a suitable available room for them. About a half an hour later, Dragomir returned to these two men's temporary room and found two laptops already set-up and waiting for telephone lines to obtain Internet access. Dragomir told the men that he had been unsuccessful in finding a vacant room with Internet access, bur that they were welcome to use his office to complete their work. The two men rejected this option and Dragomir apologized for the inconvenience and refunded the men's $175 in cash. Dragomir said at this point the men became angry and one of the guys said, You don't understand. We are here on a mission. Law enforcement officials later analyzed this need to be online as an indication that the hijackers were looking for Web pages or messages that would signal important information about their developing terrorist plot.'

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.366
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarsArchive (Brigham Young University)Same topicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political ViolenceFrench-language works237,207