MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2636839313 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2017.7946790

The importance of human dynamics in the future user authentication

2017· article· en· W2636839313 on OpenAlexaff
Wafaa Anani, Abdelkader Ouda

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMulti-factor authenticationAuthentication (law)Computer securityPasswordGeneric Bootstrapping ArchitectureChallenge-Handshake Authentication ProtocolAuthentication protocolInternet privacyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Authentication is one of the essential mechanism of a typical security model. It identifies the user legitimacy accessing any service over the network. Authentication can usually be done by a simple single-factor authentication method such as a password. Unfortunately, it is inadequate to ensure security when accessing variant resources and services across the Internet. Therefore, for users to authenticate their identity, there is always a need to work on a different security method that could be used as an extra layer of security can be implemented. This paper presents a human dynamic-based user authentication, relying on the assumption that the actions and interactions of personal, interpersonal, and social factors of a user would be very hard to impersonate. Furthermore, the study includes experiments to help understand human dynamics in dealing with individuals, groups, and societies to be the essential aspects for the new generation user authentication.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUser Authentication and Security SystemsFrench-language works237,207