MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402070518 · doi:10.62051/zw6md078

Legal Reflections: Optimizing Global Strategies Against Cyber Sexual Violence Through Comparative Perspectives

2024· article· en· W4402070518 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Di Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions on Social Science Education and Humanities Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual violenceCriminologyPolitical scienceComputer securitySociologyEngineering ethicsComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an era of deepening digitalization, cyber sexual violence (CSV) emerges as a global challenge, encompassing a broad spectrum of abuses including sexual harassment, exploitation, and extortion through digital platforms. The infamous Nth Room case in South Korea, where hundreds of women and minors were coerced into producing and sharing sexually exploitative materials online, starkly highlights the extreme and horrifying aspects of CSV. This incident not only galvanized global attention towards the menace of CSV but also prompted a reevaluation of the capability and efficiency of existing legal frameworks across various jurisdictions to combat such crimes.This study employs a comparative legal analysis to scrutinize how different legal systems, including those of the United States, Canada, European countries, and Asian countries like Japan, South Korea, and China, address the issue of CSV. By delving into some pertinent examples, the paper aims to uncover disparities in legal responses, the effectiveness of regulatory measures, and the limitations of these measures in preventing and punishing cyber sexual violence. Key findings underscore the urgent need for international legal standards and highlight the pivotal role of international cooperation and technological solutions in combating CSV. Ultimately, this research proposes a series of recommendations for legal reform, advocating for the development of a more effective legal framework that not only punishes perpetrators but also protects and supports victims, preventing the recurrence of such 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 categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.299 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions on Social Science Education and Humanities ResearchSame topicHate Speech and Cyberbullying DetectionFrench-language works237,207