MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2539311535 · doi:10.29173/alr455

Who Controls the Past Now Controls the Future: Counter-Terrorism, Data Mining and Privacy

2016· article· en· W2539311535 on OpenAlexaffvenue
W Renke

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Law Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Law and Evidence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrorismCounter terrorismCharterPoliticsComputer securityInternet privacyBusinessInformation privacyPersonally identifiable informationPolitical scienceLaw and economicsLawEconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent world events have created international security concerns and a demand for counter-terrorist measures. Information fuels counter-terrorism. "Data mining" has been touted as a means for acquiring needed information. This article describes data mining, explores its social, political and personal risks, then assesses its impact on the Charter-protected right to privacy. The author proposes a framework for the constitutionally appropriate regulation of data mining. Data mining is portrayed as a potentially valuable counter-terrorism tool which must be governed responsibly, if its costs are not to exceed its benefits.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.021
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0090.006
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Law ReviewSame topicCriminal Law and EvidenceFrench-language works237,207