MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382451227 · doi:10.2196/41724

A Survey of Internet Performance During COVID-19

2023· article· en· W4382451227 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lars Dittmann

Bibliographic record

VenueIproceedings · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurfewThe InternetInternet privacyComputer sciencePhishingComputer securityEncryptionKey (lock)Work (physics)eHealthHealth careCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)World Wide WebEngineeringMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Since the beginning of 2020, many societal systems have been used to extend the health care system, which were not planned for, and as such, there is concern for its collapse. Clearly, the collapse of the health care system, primarily hospitals, has been a key concern, and many initiatives, including lockdown and curfew, were taken to avoid such a collapse. The internet was the key platform used to enable people to work from home, provide remote teaching, conduct meetings on the web, etc. However, when it comes to data communication and processing, the risk of collapse is not the only risk, and maybe not even the biggest one. Many systems were not properly adapted for used in such a hurry, which did not allow time (and concern) for a proper risk and privacy assessment. Objective This paper presents internet performance statistics and analyzes how this knowledge can be used in future designs of internet-based telemedical solutions. Methods Statistics regarding traffic increases and security attacks on the internet during 2020 and 2021 were analyzed. Results The internet did not collapse during the COVID pandemic—as many people had predicted. However, the massive use of the internet, in new innovative ways, created a number of new opportunities for cybersecurity breach. Especially, the use videoconferences enabled made-in-middle attacks, phishing, and other classical breaches in new ways due to insufficient authentication and content encryption. Conclusions Even though a large amount of experience has been gathered with respect to scaling eHealth systems, a minimum amount of improvement with respect to privacy and security has been identified. Conflicts of Interest None declared.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIproceedingsSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207