MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Дипфейк как угроза политической коммуникации

2025· article· ru· W4406379301 on OpenAlex
Н.И. Михеев

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueВек информации (сетевое издание) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageru
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal and Policy Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigitizationPoliticsThe InternetData sciencePopulationComputer scienceQuarter (Canadian coin)Public relationsPolitical scienceSocial scienceSociologyWorld Wide WebGeographyTelecommunicationsLawDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

в начале 2000 года, сложно было представить, что через 24 года у трёх из четырёх жителей России будет доступ к интернету. А пользоваться социальными медиа будут 73% населения. Такие данные приводит Datareportal в отчёте отчете «Digital 2024: Country Headlines Report» [Datareportal]. Подобная статистка говорит о том, что уровень цифровизации почти за одну четверть века текущего столетия значительно вырос. Чем больше новых цифровых платформ, систем и процессов, тем больше появляется новых цифровых инструментов. Одним новым, ещё малоисследованным инструментом служит термин – дипфейк. Целью настоящего исследования является теоретическое и сущностное изучение понятия дипфейка. Нового инструмента, с помощью которого возможно повлиять на политическую коммуникацию. Задачами исследования являются: изучить и раскрыть понятие дипфейка и его разновидностей, определить кто и каким образом может использовать дипфейки в политической коммуникации, оценить риски и угрозы дифейков, и предложить пути решения данной цифровой угрозой. Результаты. В ходе работы были выявлены сущность и основновные виды дипфейков, приведены примеры политических угроз с применением дипфейков, сделан вывод и дано предложение о необходимости разработки нормативно правовой базы, устанавливающей и регламентирующей работу создание дипфейков. вack in the early 2000s, it was difficult to imagine that within 24 years, three out of four Russians would have access to the internet. And 73% of the population would use social media. These statistics are provided by Datareportal in its report "Digital 2024: Country Headlines Report". Such figures indicate that the level of digitization has increased significantly over the last quarter of the current century. With the emergence of new digital platforms, systems, and processes, new digital tools have also emerged. One such new tool, which is still relatively unexplored, is deepfake. The purpose of this study is to theoretically and essentially study the concept of deepfake, a new tool that can be used to influence political communication. The objectives of the research are: to study and reveal the concept of deepfake and its varieties, to determine who can use deepfakes in political communication and how, to assess the risks and threats of deepfakes, and to propose ways to solve this digital threat. Results. In the course of the work, the essence and main types of deepfakes were identified. Examples of political threats using deepfakes are given, a conclusion is drawn and a proposal is made on the need to develop a regulatory framework that establishes and regulates the creation of deepfakes.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.597
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.010

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.379 · 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