MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2796514948 · doi:10.3138/topia.9.35

The Culture of Surveillance: G-Men Redux and Total Information Awareness

2003· article· en· W2796514948 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Leslie Regan Shade

Bibliographic record

VenueTOPIA Canadian Journal of Cultural Studies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntelligence, Security, War Strategy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrorismIdentity theftGovernment (linguistics)Public relationsPoliticsAgency (philosophy)National securityPolitical scienceBusinessInternet privacyComputer securityLawSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Part of the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s Information Awareness Office, the Total Information Awareness (TIA) project, enacted in the wake of September 11th, aims to capture the “information signature” of citizens suspected of terrorism or criminal acts. Technical means (including computer algorithms and human analysis) afford the government the ability to track those involved in “low-intensity/low-density” forms of warfare and crime, its ultimate goal to track individuals through collecting as much information about them as possible.Various public interest groups have criticized this initiative, particularly on the basis of privacy and security risks, identity theft, misuse of information, and overt citizen surveillance. This article will provide an overview of TIA and situate it within an ongoing political economy of the military-industrial complex, now revamped for an emerging security industry.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.041
Scholarly communication0.0130.008
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTOPIA Canadian Journal of Cultural StudiesSame topicIntelligence, Security, War StrategyFrench-language works237,207