Towards Secure Industrial IoT: Blockchain System With Credit-Based Consensus Mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) plays an indispensable role for Industry 4.0, where people are committed to implement a general, scalable, and secure IIoT system to be adopted across various industries. However, existing IIoT systems are vulnerable to single point of failure and malicious attacks, which cannot provide stable services. Due to the resilience and security promise of blockchain, the idea of combining blockchain and Internet of Things (IoT) gains considerable interest. However, blockchains are power-intensive and low-throughput, which are not suitable for power-constrained IoT devices. To tackle these challenges, we present a blockchain system with credit-based consensus mechanism for IIoT. We propose a credit-based proof-of-work (PoW) mechanism for IoT devices, which can guarantee system security and transaction efficiency simultaneously. In order to protect sensitive data confidentiality, we design a data authority management method to regulate the access to sensor data. In addition, our system is built based on directed acyclic graph -structured blockchains, which is more efficient than the Satoshi-style blockchain in performance. We implement the system on Raspberry Pi, and conduct a case study for the smart factory. Extensive evaluation and analysis results demonstrate that credit-based PoW mechanism and data access control are secure and efficient in IIoT.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".