MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Implementation of Privacy Protection Policies

2011· book-chapter· en· W2502867929 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Noushin Ashrafi, Jean-Pierre Kuilboer

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in electronic commerce (AEC) book series/Advances in electronic commerce series · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrivacy policyInternet privacyBusinessThe InternetContext (archaeology)Information privacyQuarter (Canadian coin)FTC Fair Information PracticeExploratory researchPrivacy by DesignCensusPersonally identifiable informationData Protection Act 1998Privacy softwarePublic relationsInformation privacy lawComputer securityPolitical scienceComputer scienceWorld Wide WebSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on U.S. census data, more than three quarter of Internet users are concerned about having control over the release of their private information when using online services. To ease consumers’ concerns, the Internet industry has come up with self-regulatory practices. The effectiveness of self-regulatory practices and the commitment of the Internet industry to online privacy are yet to be evaluated. The questions regarding self-regulation, what it means from the industry point of view, and to what extent it is implanted remains unclear. This study is exploratory in nature and attempts to examine privacy issues in the context of fair information practices and how they are perceived and practiced by the top 500 interactive companies in the United States. Our results confirm that most companies ask for consumer trust by claiming benevolence. However, they fall short when it comes to costly implementations of comprehensive privacy protection policies.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in electronic commerce (AEC) book series/Advances in electronic commerce seriesSame topicPrivacy, Security, and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207