MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016775633

A rights management approach to securing data distribution in coalitions

2010· article· en· W3016775633 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

VenueQUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Rights Management and Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of Wollongong
KeywordsComputer securityCloud computingService providerData governanceProcess (computing)Computer scienceAccess controlBusinessService (business)Control (management)Distribution (mathematics)Data Protection Act 1998Internet privacyData qualityMarketing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As network capacity has increased over the past decade, individuals and organisations have found it increasingly appealing to make use of remote services in the form of service-oriented architectures and cloud computing services. Data processed by remote services, however, is no longer under the direct control of the individual or organisation that provided the data, leaving data owners at risk of data theft or misuse. This paper describes a model by which data owners can control the distribution and use of their data throughout a dynamic coalition of service providers using digital rights management technology. Our model allows a data owner to establish the trustworthiness of every member of a coalition employed to process data, and to communicate a machine-enforceable usage policy to every such member.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score0.411

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.195 · 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