MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311357294 · doi:10.5539/cis.v16n1p49

The Role of Digital Technologies in Combating Cyber-Trafficking in Persons Crimes

2022· article· en· W4311357294 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sami Alsemairi

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyberspaceHuman traffickingThe InternetEmerging technologiesBusinessPoliticsPolitical sciencePublic relationsComputer securityInternet privacyCriminologyComputer scienceSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the increase in technological development, trafficking in persons has become one of the world’s most pressing issues, with a large number of countries having been affected over the past few years. This research deals with the role of digital technologies implemented through cyberspace in detecting and combating trafficking in person’s crimes. Moreover, the research clarifies the concept of cyber-trafficking, in addition to addressing the different types of cyber-trafficking in person’s crimes. The research found that trafficking in persons is a serious crime because it violates human rights. In addition, the research found that the rate of trafficking has increased due to the global accessibility that the Internet has provided, posing great risks to the public and increasing the rate of cyber-trafficking crimes. Furthermore, the research found that the reasons of trafficking in persons were numerous due to the development of digital technologies at the beginning of the twenty-first century, with the most common motive being for illegal financial profit. Combating trafficking in persons has become an important political priority for many governments around the world, and any future success in eliminating trafficking in persons in its various forms will depend on the extent to which governments and relevant organizations are prepared to develop digital technologies and use them to combat and prevent cyber-trafficking crimes.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer and Information ScienceSame topicCybercrime and Law Enforcement StudiesFrench-language works237,207