Analyses of information security standards on data crawled from company web sites using SweClarin resources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the purpose of analysing Swedish companies’ adherence and adoption of the information security standard ISO 27001 and to examine the communicative constitution of preventive innovation in organisations, we have created a corpus of corporate texts from Swedish company websites. The corpus was analysed from multiple interdisciplinary perspectives in close cooperation with management researchers and SweClarin researchers using SweClarin tools and resources as well as standard language technology tools. Some analyses require deep reading, which was performed by management researchers, often guided by results from language analyses. Initial results have been presented at a management studies conference. In this paper, we focus on presenting the research issues, the methods used in the project, the results, and the experience of SweClarin researchers supporting researchers in social sciences. Our contribution is to show how it is possible, through the integration of human insights and digital methods, to increase the credibility and validity of a digitally acquired data set and subsequent research findings. In our view, a combination of human deep reading (management researchers), contextual lexical verification (management studies) and language technology (content and sentiment analysis) can help to sensitise computational text analysis for medium-sized data sets.
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 | 0.004 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.024 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".