Bracing for Impact - The AI Challenge - Cybersecurity and International Risks in the AI Era
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bracing for Impact: The Artificial Intelligence Challenge (A Roadmap for AI Governance in Canada)\nConference organized by IP Osgoode in collaboration with Aviv Gaon, Ian Stedman and the Zvi Meitar Institute for Legal Implications of Emerging Technologies at IDC Herzliya.\nCybersecurity and International Risks in the AI Era Cybersecurity is quickly emerging as a crucial component of every nation's security efforts. Recent events around the world have proven the importance of developing the tools needed to face this challenge. AI poses both a risk and opportunity. This Panel will explore the possible changes in mod- ern cybersecurity warfare in the AI era. In doing so, it will bring to the table several experts in the field in an effort to shape a better government cybersecurity policy for the next generation.\nSESSION CHAIR:Matthew Castel Partner, Orion Legal Group and Logos LP\nPANELLISTS:Roy Keidar Special Counsel, Yigal Arnon & Co. Law Firm, formerly Israeli NSA Legal Advisor\nAnn Cavoukian Distinguished Expert-in-Residence, Privacy by Design Centre of Excellence, at Ryerson University\nVictor Garcia Managing Director & CEO, ABCLive Corporation
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".