MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2624671107

Bangkok International Summit (2007) Declaration on Policing Cyberspace

2008· article· en· W2624671107 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
K. Jaishankar, Bessie Pang, Stuart Hyde

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of cyber criminology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyberspaceSummitDeclarationPolitical scienceCybercrimePublic relationsFocus groupTheme (computing)SociologyLawThe Internet
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IntroductionThe Conference on Policing Cyberspace of POLCYB,4 first held in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada in 1999, has become a premier international forum for the presentation and discussion of advances in Policing cyberspace and the multifaceted issue of cyber crimes. In view of recent scientific advances and the ongoing consideration of policy options for addressing the cyber crime problem, the Seventh Annual Conference in Bangkok, Thailand on November 5 - 9, 2007, presented a timely opportunity to address key questions concerning policing cyberspace. The technical program for the conference contained a diverse and multidisciplinary assemblage of more than 100 abstracts submitted by authors from many countries, contributing to the global scientific effort on prevention of cyber crime.Forty experts, assembled into four groups, at the Law Enforcement Academy, Bangkok, Thailand, worked after the conference at the Post-Summit Digital Evidence focus group discussions. The focus groups addressed a series of key, policy-relevant questions concerning Policing Cyberspace such as Emerging Future Trends and Technologies/Malware, Financial and Organized Crime, and Protocols, Child Exploitation. The focus groups presented their findings on 9th November 2007. Summaries of these findings were available for viewing by all registered conference participants in the POLCYB website. Collectively, the four focus group summaries provided the foundation for the Conference Declaration, a summary document that was endorsed unanimously by members of the four expert groups.Theme and Sub-themes of the SummitThe Summit Theme was, International Policing and Policy Perspectives on Countering Cybercrime and the sub-themes were:* Challenges in Collection and Application of Digital Evidence.* Digital Identity - New technologies; best practices and challenges in development of standards and frameworks; policy gap analysis.* Current Cyber crime Trends / Threats - Investigation & Prosecution perspectives.* Data Protection, Privacy, and Identity Management.* Building Trusted Communities in the Virtual World.* E-Money Laundering in Financial Sectors: Legal Obligations of Banking.* Disrupting Organized Crime.* Child Exploitation.* Pharmaceutical Crime on Internet.* Economic Crime / Organized Crime:* Counterfeit Products / Intellectual Property* Spam, Phishing, Botnets* Identity Theft* & Harvest* Pharmaceutical Crime on Internet* Online Games* Online Trading/Banking* Risk assessment of Converging Technologies and Emerging Technologies* Challenges and Best Practices in Development of Trusted Communities* Privacy* Child Exploitation* Response from Multinational Companies to Hack and Harvest incidents and other cyber threats* Training and Accreditation (Forensic Investigator; Forensic Analyst; Forensic Accountant, etc.)* Cyber Intelligence (Honey Pot, Email Spamming, etc.)* Counter cyber intelligence (technologies that thwart computer forensic investigations)* Best Practices in investigation and prosecution using Digital Evidence (Incident Reports, Lab Management; Digital Evidence Recovery; Network Forensics, etc.)* Protection of Industrial Infrastructure* Homeland Security / Critical Infrastructure Protection / Cyber-terrorism* Drafting Principles / Impact / Enforcement of Legislations and Polices relating to Cyber crime / Information Security / Communications / Privacy* Integrated Approach to Management of Hi-tech Offenders* Considerations for developing communication protocols to build Trusted Communities.BANKOK INTERNATIONAL SUMMIT (2007) DECLARATION ON POLICING CYBERSPACE: BASED ON THE FACILITATED FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONObjectives of the Focus group discussion:* To share information on challenges in the collection and application of digital evidence in terms of social, legal, economic considerations. …

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.670
Threshold uncertainty score0.659

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of cyber criminologySame topicCybercrime and Law Enforcement StudiesFrench-language works237,207