MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2987065703 · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v14i1.7296

Towards Automated Sexual Violence Report Tracking

2020· article· en· W2987065703 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Malware Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual violenceTracking (education)Task (project management)Computer sciencePsychologyRecallArtificial intelligenceScalabilityCognitive psychologyMachine learningComputer securityCriminologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Warning: This paper may contain trigger words that might be uncomfortable to some readers. Tracking sexual violence is a challenging task. In this paper, we present a supervised learning-based automated sexual violence report tracking model that is more scalable, and reliable than its crowdsource based counterparts. We define the sexual violence report tracking problem by considering victim, perpetrator contexts and the nature of the violence. We find that our model could identify sexual violence reports with a precision and recall of 80.4% and 83.4%, respectively. Moreover, we also applied the model during and after the #MeToo movement. Several interesting findings are discovered which are not easily identifiable from a shallow analysis.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.434
Threshold uncertainty score0.373

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.245 · 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