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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.331
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.030
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