Contribution to the harm assessment of darknet markets: topic modelling drug reviews on Dark0de Reborn
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Amid the global opioid crisis, the volume of drug trade via darknet markets has risen to an all-time high. The steady increase can be explained by the reliable operation of darknet markets, affected by community-building trust factors reducing the risks during the process of the darknet drug trade. This study was designed to explore the risk reduction efforts of the community of a selected darknet market and therefore contribute to the harm assessment of darknet markets. We performed Latent Dirichlet Allocation topic modelling on customer reviews of drug products (n = 25,107) scraped from the darknet market Dark0de Reborn in 2021. We obtained a model resulting in 4 topics (coherence score = 0.57): (1) feedback on satisfaction with the transaction; (2) report on order not received; (3) information on the quality of the product; and (4) feedback on vendor reliability. These topics identified in the customer reviews suggest that the community of the selected darknet market implemented a safer form of drug supply, reducing risks at the payment and delivery stages and the potential harms of drug use. However, the pitfalls of this form of community-initiated safer supply support the need for universally available and professional harm reduction and drug checking services. These findings, and our methodological remarks on applying text mining, can enhance future research to further examine risk and harm reduction efforts across darknet markets.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".