MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905179958 · doi:10.1038/sdata.2018.286

On the privacy-conscientious use of mobile phone data

2018· editorial· en· W2905179958 on OpenAlexafffund
Yves-Alexandre de Montjoye, Sébastien Gambs, Vincent D. Blondel, Geoffrey Canright, Nicolas de Cordes, Sébastien Deletaille, Kenth Engø‐Monsen, Manuel García–Herranz, Jake Kendall, Cameron F Kerry, Gautier Krings, Emmanuel Letouzé, Miguel Luengo-Oroz, Nuria Oliver, Luc Rocher, Alex Rutherford, Zbigniew Smoreda, Jessica Steele, Erik Wetter, Alex Pentland, Linus Bengtsson

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Data · 2018
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersBelgian Federal Science Policy OfficeFonds De La Recherche Scientifique - FNRSAgence Nationale de la RechercheUNICEFNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAgence Française de DéveloppementBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsMobile phoneInternet privacyComputer scienceData sciencePhoneField (mathematics)Scale (ratio)Social mediaMobile deviceComputational sociologyWorld Wide WebTelecommunicationsGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The breadcrumbs we leave behind when using our mobile phones—who somebody calls, for how long, and from where—contain unprecedented insights about us and our societies. Researchers have compared the recent availability of large-scale behavioral datasets, such as the ones generated by mobile phones, to the invention of the microscope, giving rise to the new field of computational social science.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.009
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0200.031
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations168
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific DataSame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207