MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294834029 · doi:10.24908/ss.v20i3.15762

From Privacy to Social Legibility

2022· article· en· W4294834029 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa M. Austin

Bibliographic record

VenueSurveillance & Society · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegibilityFocus (optics)Internet privacyCorporate governanceSociologyState (computer science)Law and economicsComputer scienceBusinessAdvertising

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper draws upon James Scott’s Seeing Like a State (1998) to argue that privacy law currently suffers from (at least) three defects: a focus on the legibility of individuals that is too narrow, a focus on collection and subsequent use of data that comes too late, and a focus on rights and harms that ignores the need to create new social structures that can empower more local forms of collective decision-making. What this outlines in broad brushstrokes is the need to enfold privacy concerns within a broader data governance framework concerned with the fair and just terms of social legibility.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSurveillance & SocietySame topicPrivacy, Security, and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207