MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946604203 · doi:10.21810/jicw.v2i1.959

The Role of the Dark Web in the Crime and Terrorism Nexus

2019· article· en· W2946604203 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
CASIS

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Intelligence Conflict and Warfare · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeep WebCybercrimeNexus (standard)Law enforcementTerrorismPresentation (obstetrics)The InternetPolitical scienceOrder (exchange)CriminologyLawEngineeringSociologyBusinessWorld Wide WebComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On November 15, 2018 the Canadian Association for Security and Intelligence Studies (CASIS) Vancouver hosted its tenth roundtable meeting which covered “The Role of the dark web in the Crime and Terrorism Nexus.” The presentation was hosted by Dr. Richard Frank, an assistant professor in the School of Criminology at Simon Fraser University, as well as the Director of the International CyberCrime Research Centre (ICCRC). In the presentation, Dr. Frank began by explaining the operations of the dark web, and then moved on to discuss why the dark web cannot just be shut down, as well as actions law enforcement (policing) could take in order to counter the activities on the dark web. The subsequent roundtable discussion opened with an analysis of the operations of Silk Road, an online marketplace on the dark web that specializes in the sale of illegal drugs, weapons, and stolen identities. The topics of interest in the discussion were the effects of internet-based trade of illicit goods on organized crime and local drug markets, in addition to whether the dark web can be used constructively.

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)0.005
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.019
Scholarly communication0.0160.016
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Intelligence Conflict and WarfareSame topicCybercrime and Law Enforcement StudiesFrench-language works237,207