MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3028695384 · doi:10.1016/s2589-7500(20)30133-3

The need for privacy with public digital contact tracing during the COVID-19 pandemic

2020· article· en· W3028695384 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yoshua Bengio, Richard D. Janda, Yun William Yu, Daphne Ippolito, Max Jarvie, Dan Pilat, Brooke Struck, Sekoul Krastev, Abhinav Sharma

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Digital Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCOVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of TorontoMcGill UniversityGroup for Research in Decision AnalysisConcordia UniversityUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContact tracingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Pandemic2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Internet privacyVirologyTracingComputer scienceMedicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)Outbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digital contact tracing applications represent a powerful yet controversial strategy to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. Manual contact tracing has important challenges, not limited to recall bias and delays in communicating with high-risk contacts.1 Digital technologies are already increasingly used in the context of health-care delivery and clinical trials.2 Due to the considerable strain on public health institutions, digital contact tracing through mobile phones is being used or explored in a growing number of countries despite concerns raised over individual privacy and state surveillance.

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)0.051
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.235
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0510.235
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.009
Scholarly communication0.0170.026
Open science0.0030.013
Research integrity0.0110.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.006

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations155
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Digital HealthSame topicCOVID-19 Digital Contact TracingFrench-language works237,207