MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7112519860

Riktlinjer för införande av biometri Technology i Blekinge hälso-och sjukvården med fokus på mänskliga föreställningar och kostnadsfaktor

2010· article· en· W7112519860 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiometricsSoftware deploymentAuthentication (law)Identification (biology)Identity (music)PerceptionMetis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biometrics Technology is an authentication technology that identifies the individuals from their physical and behavioral characteristics. Despite the fact that biometrics technology provides robust authentication and enhanced security, it has not yet been implemented in many parts of the world due to certain issues i.e. human perceptions of the biometrics technology and cost factor, involved in the deployment of biometrics technology. As the biometrics technology involves identity management of individuals that’s why the humans perceptions of biometrics technology i.e. privacy concerns, security concerns and user acceptance issue play a very important role in the deployment of biometrics technology. There for the human perceptions and cost factor need to be considered before any deployment of biometrics technology. The aim of this thesis work is to study and analyze how the people’s perceptions and cost factor can be solved for the deployment of biometrics technology in Blekinge health care system. Literature study, interviews and survey are performed by authors for the identification and understanding of the human perceptions and cost factor. Based on these, solutions in form of guidelines to the issues involved in the biometrics technology deployment in Blekinge health care system Sweden are given.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0060.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology)Same topicUser Authentication and Security SystemsFrench-language works237,207