MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3137236694 · doi:10.1016/s0969-4765(21)00035-7

Bridging the trust gaps in biometrics

2021· article· en· W3137236694 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel M. Curtis, Delfina Belli, Sacha Alanoca, Adriana Bora, Nicolas Miailhe, Yolanda Lannquist

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometric Technology Today · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsFuture Earth
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiometricsDisinformationScrutinyInternet privacyBridging (networking)Computer securityBusinessPolitical scienceSocial mediaComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biometric systems promise to transform our lives by enhancing capabilities to rapidly detect, analyse and respond to human features and behaviours. Yet while we are at the dawn of the AI age, the potential applications of biometric tools have already triggered unease in the public and heightened scrutiny from policymakers. These concerns have emerged against the backdrop of a global ‘techlash’ fuelled by growing anxiety over privacy breaches, loss of data rights and disinformation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.074
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics, Open science
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics, Open science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.074
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0130.110
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0340.080
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.248 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiometric Technology TodaySame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207