MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3142021439 · doi:10.36939/cjur/vol29no1/art268

Privacy and smart cities: A Canadian survey

2020· article· en· W3142021439 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Sara Bannerman, Angela Orasch

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of urban research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Cities and Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanada Research ChairsMcMaster University
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Smart cityInternet privacyEthnic groupData collectionInformation privacySurvey data collectionSurvey researchPolitical scienceGeographyPublic relationsSociologyComputer scienceSocioeconomicsLawSocial scienceInternet of Things

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports the results of a national survey of Canadians about smart city privacy. Our research questions were: How concerned are Canadians about smart city privacy? How do these concerns intersect with age, gender, ethnicity, and location? More, what are the expectations of Canadians with regards to their ability to control, use, or opt-out of data collection in smart city context? What rights and privileges do Canadians feel are appropriate with regard to data self-determination, and what types of data are considered more sensitive than others? In part two of this paper, we review existing literature on privacy and smart cities, particularly in Canada. In part three, we outline the method used in our survey. In part four, we present the findings of our national survey on Canadian attitudes towards privacy in a smart city context. We conclude by summarizing our findings and setting out possible areas for future research.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score0.638

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.170 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of urban researchSame topicSmart Cities and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207