MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995264828 · doi:10.1109/iemcon.2019.8936140

IoT and Blockchain for Smart Locks

2019· article· en· W2995264828 on OpenAlexaff
Lucas de Camargo Silva, Mayra Samaniego, Ralph Deters

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlockchainComputer scienceInternet of ThingsEmbedded systemOperating systemComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Community-based online platforms for hospitality services have connected hosts and guests globally. With the increasing popularity of those platforms - e.g., Airbnb - some management issues have attracted the attention of researchers - for instance, granting access to properties and rooms remotely, without requiring hosts and guests to meet in person. Solutions have been proposed - e.g., locks with pin pad and vendor centralized smart locks - but they usually have shortcomings that compromise either security, privacy, or convenience. This research designs and proposes a blockchain-based system for smart door locks to provide the convenience of remote access control management, while security and privacy for both hosts and guests are not compromised. Moreover, to surpass current locks' functionalities, this research proposes a feature that enables the guests to cease the hosts' access to the lock, during their stay. This feature also guarantees to the guest that no one will be able to change that access rule without their explicit approval. The proposed solution integrates Ethereum blockchain as the foundation of the system and uses Infura API as the bridge to connect the IoT infrastructure to the blockchain network. Such architecture alleviates hardware demand from the equipment, which can favor the use of resource-constrained IoT devices. Once Ethereum is used to build the solution, and users are charged fees to perform some actions in the blockchain, the system is evaluated concerning operation costs. Three Ethereum test networks - Ganache, Ropsten, and Rinkeby - were used to run the smart contract and assess the charge to complete significant actions in the system. The results show that the cost to use the smart lock is low, especially if the benefits of security, privacy, and convenience are taken into consideration. Most of the actions yielded fees about cents of a US dollar, where the exception is a one-time payment of USD3.83 - worst-case scenario - to deploy the smart contract - i.e., setup the system.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.683
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.214 · 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.

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

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityFrench-language works237,207