MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W598929536

Passenger Data Management: Third-Party Information Management is Key to the US Registered Traveler Programme

2007· article· en· W598929536 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carroll McCormick

Bibliographic record

VenueAirports international · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Aviation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpeditingBusinessInteroperabilityClearanceService providerComputer securityService (business)OutsourcingNexus (standard)Transport engineeringEngineeringMarketingComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes the new United States Registered Traveler (RT) program in terms of the system’s functioning and its operation, which is mostly handled by the private sector unlike the US-Canada border expediting services NEXUS and FAST. The private organizations, which partner with various airports to provide RT services, must first be cleared by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). The organization that mediates between the private companies and the TSA is the Central Information Management Service (CIMS), which ensures that all providers are interoperable with one another across various airports. CIMS, in turn, has been commissioned by the Transportation Security Clearinghouse (TSC) to monitor all logistical points. RT works by creating a security lane for low-risk passengers (as deemed by a background check). Once such a consumer is in the RT program line, he or she submits biometric information such as a fingerprint or an iris scan to validate their identity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0130.017
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.043

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAirports internationalSame topicInternational Law and AviationFrench-language works237,207