MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Internet Use and Violent Extremism

2016· book-chapter· en· W2505184077 on OpenAlexaff
D. Elaine Pressman, Cristina Ivan

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in religious and cultural studies (ARCS) book series · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityInternational Centre for Comparative Criminology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer securityTerrorismRisk assessmentProtocol (science)Law enforcementConsistency (knowledge bases)Reliability (semiconductor)Risk analysis (engineering)PsychologyComputer sciencePolitical scienceInternet privacyBusinessMedicineLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter introduces a new approach to the risk assessment for violent extremism that is focused on cyber-related behaviour and content. The Violent Extremist Risk Assessment (VERA-2) protocol, used internationally, is augmented by an optional cyber-focused risk indicator protocol referred to as CYBERA. The risk indicators of CYBERA are elaborated and the application of CYBERA, conjointly with the VERA-2 risk assessment protocol, is described. The combined use of the two tools provides (1) a robust and cyber-focused risk assessment intended to provide early warning indicators of violent extremist action, (2) provides consistency and reliability in risk and threat assessments, (3) determines risk trajectories of individuals, and (4) assists intelligence and law enforcement analysts in their national security investigations. The tools are also relevant for use by psychologists, psychiatrists, communication analysts and provide relevant information that supports Terrorism Prevention Programs (TPP) and countering violent extremism (CVE) initiatives.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in religious and cultural studies (ARCS) book seriesSame topicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political ViolenceFrench-language works237,207