MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2941702032 · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2911031

Security, Performance, and Applications of Smart Contracts: A Systematic Survey

2019· article· en· W2941702032 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlockchainComputer scienceSmart contractCryptocurrencyComputer securityKey (lock)Scope (computer science)Database transactionSupply chainProcess managementEngineering managementBusinessDatabaseEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Blockchain is the promising technology of recent years, which has attracted remarkable attention in both academic studies and practical industrial applications. The smart contract is a programmable transaction that can perform a sophisticated task, execute automatically, and store on the blockchain. The smart contract is the key component of the blockchain, which has made blockchain a technology beyond the scope of the cryptocurrencies and applicable for a variety of applications such as healthcare, IoT, supply chain, digital identity, business process management, and more. Although in recent years the progress toward improving blockchain technology with the focus on the smart contract has been impressive, there is a lack of reviewing the smart contract topic. This paper systematically reviews the key concepts and proposes the direction of recent studies and developments regarding the smart contract. The research studies are presented in three main categories: 1) security methods and tools; 2) performance improvement approaches; and 3) decentralized applications based on smart contracts.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.246 · 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