MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7135629018

Social Network from the Perspective of Surveillance Theory

2014· dissertation· cs· W7135629018 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Martin Janda

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languagecs
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOmnipresencePanopticonField (mathematics)Perspective (graphical)The InternetObject (grammar)Social network (sociolinguistics)Assemblage (archaeology)Key (lock)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper concentrates on the general trend of extending the surveillance as it is nicely captured in the case of online social network Facebook. The text emphasized the omnipresence and hidden techniques used for mining of personal data, as depicted on the phenomenon of consumer surveillance. Data kept in the in databases create a virtual image of an individual that subsequently replaces him in the cyberspace, which leads to discrimination of the individual due to an unequal access to products and information. On introducing the surveillant assemblage the paper shows how the modern surveillance has multiple sources and its object can be anyone who is browsing the internet. Main source for the analysis are the works of Surveillance Studies, most prominently the Canadian sociologist David Lyon. The work centers on defining what part of social sciences field in the age of IT technologies occupies the panopticon - the key concept of surveillance studies - and what new aspects of surveillance are appearing in the society thanks to the development of internet and especially the social networks.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature)Same topicPrivacy, Security, and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207