MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972829814 · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2019.08.058

Smart-AC: A New Framework Concept for Modeling Access Control Policy

2019· article· en· W2972829814 on OpenAlexafffund
Nadine Kashmar, Mehdi Adda, Mirna Atieh, Hussein Ibrahim

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia Computer Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAccess Control and Trust
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à RimouskiCegep de Sept Iles
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceInterconnectivityDomain (mathematical analysis)Cloud computingAccess controlSecurity policyControl (management)Computer securityArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As new technologies grow such as Internet of Things (IoT) and cloud computing, the way how people interact with devices change. The current world of interconnectivity, the heterogeneity of networks, platforms, applications, and the diversity of users make the modernization of security methods inevitable fact. Access Control (AC) is one of these essential security requirements in this domain. The continuous technology propagation forces the need to enhance AC methods, which are presented in the literature by combining features from two or more models based on a given case or scenario. The aim is to enforce AC policy and create secure communication environments. In this paper, we summarize some of the proposed methods with combined features from various AC models in the light of new technologies. Also, we present a deeper look for our idea of finding a methodology for a new dynamic Smart-AC model and a use case, in addition to the challenges to implement it. Our aim is to find a general AC framework to overcome the limitations of the presented AC methods, since they are not generic enough and do not encompass a general concept to tackle the various IT cases. The concept of our Smart-AC method is that it can be oriented to include (or exclude) all (or some) AC features for a given scenario or project, and work as a generic basis to encompass the heterogeneity of all AC models. Our proposed model aims to follow up AC requirements along with technology propagations and developments.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.011
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia Computer ScienceSame topicAccess Control and TrustFrench-language works237,207