FOUNDATIONS FOR THE HARMONIZATION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SECURITY STANDARDS Item: Deliverable #1 Source: Cooperation on Security of Information Systems Joint Task 01 Status: Revised Draft
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is the first work product of Joint Task 1 (JT01) defined in the Joint Workplan for cooperation on Security of Information Systems [1]. The objectives of JT01 are to: (a) Establish a common set of security functionality classes, representative of international and regional market-driven needs. (b) Develop a common approach to the creation of profiles from these security functionality classes consistent with current regional and international activities. (c) Create guidelines to support the prototyping of such profiles and their interpretability. This paper provides a base for common understanding of critical terms and concepts. It discusses the efforts and terms used in the four major Information Technology Security efforts: (a) The U. S . Department of Defense Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria (TCSEC) [2], also known as the Orange Book. (b) The Information Technology Security Evaluation Criteria (ITSEC) [3]. (c) The Canadian Trusted Computer Product Evaluation Crit...
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 | 0.072 | 0.093 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.013 |
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".