MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212791083 · doi:10.31235/osf.io/h68c4

PRIVACY AND POWER AROUND BEIJING 2022 OLYMPICS: LEGAL AND POLITICAL PERSPECTIVES

2022· preprint· en· W4212791083 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qianye Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeijingGovernment (linguistics)Political sciencePoliticsComputer securityEncryptionInternet privacyChinaPublic relationsPublic administrationLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Olympic Winter Games Beijing 2022 launched a smartphone application, MY2022, to monitor the health status of participants to control the spread of the virus. However, Citizen Lab, a Canadian research institute, found that the application has weak or unencrypted encryption in the data storage and transmission process, leading to users' privacy being exposed to potential leakage risk. In addition, the study found that the app's instant messaging feature contained a list of sensitive words that had not been activated. Although Citizen Lab's report stated that these security vulnerabilities might be unintentional failures by developers rather than an intentional arrangement by the Chinese government, the criticisms were still widely cited by international media, bringing pressure for the Chinese Olympic Committee and the Chinese authorities. Despite that International Olympic Committee and the Chinese Olympic Committee declared to have fixed the bugs after the release of the research report, much beyond the technical failures awaits Beijing to learn.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.031
Scholarly communication0.0150.007
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0080.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.326
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPrivacy, Security, and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207