A Semantic-based Approach to Reduce the Reading Time of Privacy Policies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Privacy policy is a legal document in which the users are informed about the data practices used by the organizations. Past research indicates that the privacy policies are long and hard to understand. They are also known to have incomplete content. Users are not inclined to read the policy as they have to read long policies to find information about data practices of an organization. The solution that we are proposing in this research is to assist users with finding relevant content to their queries using semantic approach. This thesis presents the development of domain ontology for privacy policies. Natural Language Processing was used to understand the content of the policies and capture vocabulary for the ontology. This vocabulary was further used to build the ontology so that the ontology highlights relevant sentences related to a privacy concern. We validated and evaluated the ontology using different methods: competency questions, data driven, metric based and user evaluation. Results from the evaluation of ontology show that the amount of text to read is significantly reduced as the users have to only read selected text that ranged from 1% to 30% of a privacy policy. The amount of text depended on the query and its associated keywords. This signifies that the time required to read a policy is significantly reduced as the ontology directs user to the right content for a query. This finding was also confirmed by the results of the user study session. The results from the user study session indicated that the users found ontology helpful in finding relevant selected sentences to read as compared to reading the entire policy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".