Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite being the most widely used authentication mechanism, password-based authentication is not very secure, being easily guessed or brute-forced. To address this, many systems which especially value security adopt Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA), in which multiple different authentication mechanisms are used concurrently. JitHDA (Just-in-time human dynamics based authentication engine) is a new authentication mechanism which can add another option to MFA capabilities. JitHDA observes human behaviour and human dynamics to gather up to date information on the user from which authentication questions can be dynamically generated. This paper proposes a system that implements JitHDA, which we call Autonomous Inquiry-based Authentication Chatbot (AIAC). AIAC uses anomalous events gathered from a user’s recent activity to create personalized questions for the user to answer, and is designed to improve its own capabilities over time using neural networks trained on data gathered during authentication sessions. Due to using the user’s recent activity, they will be easy for the authentic user to answer and hard for a fraudulent user to guess, and as the user’s recent history updates between authentication sessions new questions will be dynamically generated to replace old ones. We intend to show in this paper that AIAC is a viable implementation of JitHDA.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it