MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2498700575 · doi:10.2495/dne-v11-n3-295-305

Access and privilege in secure big data analysis

2016· article· en· W2498700575 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
W.R. Simpson, Kevin E. Foltz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsPrivilege (computing)Big dataComputer securityComputer scienceInternet privacyData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The distributed data sources and strict security controls of the Enterprise Level Security (ELS) architecture present challenges for data mining.The ELS architecture is a secure enterprise system that enforces strict security controls in a uniform way across an enterprise.It includes end-to-end bilateral authentication for all human as well as machine interactions and verifiable claims-based access controls.Claims provisioning is automated and centrally managed based on authoritative attributes of active entities in the enterprise.While these security provisions are necessary for secure systems, they present some unique challenges to big data analyses.Key among these are non-standard schemas, non-standard access and privilege, restricted access to analysis outcomes, and overall privilege handling.Some of the distributed data sets may be fully or partially accessible, or even not accessible.Users with limited access may compute different results than those with broad access.We discuss the problems encountered for data mining in an ELS architecture and possible solutions.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.014
Scholarly communication0.0110.024
Open science0.0030.012
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and EcodynamicsSame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207