MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2786604896 · doi:10.5539/ass.v14n2p81

Study on Internet Finance Credit Information Sharing Based on Block Chain Technology

2018· article· en· W2786604896 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maoran Zhu, Xin Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEncryptionBlock (permutation group theory)The InternetComputer scienceDecentralizationData sharingComputer securityServerBig dataSupply chainFinanceBusinessComputer networkWorld Wide WebData miningMarketingEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With development of Big Data technology these years, Internet financial companies in China started trying using big data technology to do credit investigation instead of traditional methods. But there is some limitation and problem in terms of data acquisition channel, information asymmetry and data privacy protection, etc. Block chain, characterized in unalterability and decentralization comes into people's sight. This paper will introduce block chain technology, explore the use of block chain technology in Internet financial credit investigation, and put forward an internet financial credit data sharing model based on block chain, which mainly composed by the Fin-tech Federate Servers group (FFS), the user data storage structure and a distributed database system (DDBS). By combining DPoS and re-encryption technology, the model has the characteristics of non-tampering, authorized access and convenient accountability. Through this model, the user data is recorded by the trusted agent, encrypted by asymmetric encryption technology, and anchored to the chain of the block periodically.

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)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.009
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicFinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital FinanceFrench-language works237,207