MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7015010889

Rise of the Canadian Network Society

2021· other· en· W7015010889 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTheseus (Ammattikorkeakoulujen) · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScope (computer science)Data collectionLegislationPersonally identifiable informationInformation privacyData Protection Act 1998Data sharingQualitative propertySet (abstract data type)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current protection acts and legislations set in place for Canadian residents regarding their privacy and securities online are not adequate and must be reviewed. It was investigated whether Canadian residents are aware of how much data is being collected about them while operating in online spheres. Moreover, the lack of protection for Canadian residents regarding data collection and information sharing in the marketing and advertising sphere. The scope of research highlighted this gap and shed light on the importance of consumers' privacy and security. Through mixed methods of both quantitative and qualitative research, a survey was administrated to Canadian residents to examine their knowledge on current legislation regarding data privacy and their overall knowledge of how organizations surveil, collect, and distribute their personal data. It was discovered that Canadian residents are informed of the scope in which their data is being collected, however, are not informed on the full implications of this collection. More importantly, a majority of Canadian resident respondents are ill informed on the current legislations and regulations set in place to protect them. Canadian residents showed immense interest in requesting more information on how they can stop this invasion of privacy in collection practices and voiced that more stringent protocols should be put in place to better regulate this industry. Current laws and regulations regarding the collection of personal data in online sphere are outdated. Furthermore, call the need to be reexamined, updated, changed, and quantified. Although Canadian residents are aware of the data collection being conducted, Canadian residents feel organizations are being misleading and therefore do not feel implicit consent is valid in such cases.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.742

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0210.008
Scholarly communication0.0130.004
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0590.006

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheseus (Ammattikorkeakoulujen)→French-language works237,207→