MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087266330 · doi:10.4018/ijepr.20210401.oa4

COVID-19 Contact Tracing

2020· article· en· W3087266330 on OpenAlexaff
Teresa Scassa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of E-Planning Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCOVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContact tracingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Context (archaeology)Agency (philosophy)Corporate governancePublic relationsWork (physics)PandemicPublic healthPolitical scienceInternet privacyBusinessSociologyEngineeringGeographyMedicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)DiseaseComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article surveys the rise of contact tracing technologies during the COVID-19 pandemic and some of the privacy, ethical, and human rights issues they raise. It examines the relationship of these technologies to local public health initiatives, and how the privacy debate over these apps made the technology in some cases less responsive to public health agency needs. The article suggests that as countries enter the return to normal phase, the more important and more invasive contact tracing and disease surveillance technologies will be deployed at the local level in the context of employment, transit, retail services, and other activities. The smart city may be co-opted for COVID-19 surveillance, and individuals will experience tracking and monitoring as they go to work, shop, dine, and commute. The author questions whether the attention given to national contact tracing apps has overshadowed more local contexts where privacy, ethical, and human rights issues remain deeply important but relatively unexamined. This raises issues for city local governance and urban e-planning.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.248
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of E-Planning ResearchSame topicCOVID-19 Digital Contact TracingFrench-language works237,207