MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810161871 · doi:10.14569/ijacsa.2018.090661

Introducing a Cybersecurity Mindset into Software Engineering Undergraduate Courses

2018· article· en· W2810161871 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ingrid Buckley, Janusz Zalewski, J. Peter

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation and Cyber Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMindsetComputer scienceComputer securitySoftwareWorkforceOrder (exchange)Software engineeringEngineering managementArtificial intelligenceOperating systemEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cybersecurity is a growing problem globally. Software helps to drive and optimize businesses in every aspect of modern life. Software systems have been under continued attacks by malicious entities, and in some cases, the consequences have been catastrophic. In order to tackle this pervasive problem, emphasis has been placed on educating software developers on how to develop secure systems. The majority of attacks on software systems have been largely due to negligence, lack of education, or incorrect application of cybersecurity defenses. As a result, there is a movement to increase cybersecurity education at all levels: novice, intermediate and expert. At the college level, students can be exposed to cybersecurity skills and principles that will better equip them as they transition into the workforce. A case study is presented which assesses the cybersecurity knowledge of juniors and seniors in a software engineering degree program taught over a one-semester period.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.004

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Advanced Computer Science and ApplicationsSame topicInformation and Cyber SecurityFrench-language works237,207