MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2935474866 · doi:10.22215/etd/2017-12132

Cybersecurity in Consumer Adoption of Smart Home Technology

2017· dissertation· en· W2935474866 on OpenAlexaffabout
Raed Iskandar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHome automationComputer securityInternet of ThingsBusinessQuarter (Canadian coin)MarketingConsumer privacyInternet privacyEngineeringComputer scienceInformation privacyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The highly anticipated smart home technology for everyday life has been growing over the past quarter century.Using standard technology adoption models, previous research produced conflicting results that did not reflect the market accurately.Amongst the indicated challenges for the future of smart home technology is the commonly overlooked barrier cybersecurity.To better understand the market's expectation we conducted consumer interviews that produced a modified model for smart home adoption in the Canadian market.The resulting adapted model proposes a link between cybersecurity and the behavioral intent of potential consumers.Components of the cybersecurity determinant are identified as trust, safety, and privacy which are moderated by the consumer's level of technical knowledge.Implications of our findings could improve the performance of smart home technology in the market and inspire the creation of innovative solutions that increase the security of the IoT 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPrivacy, Security, and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207