MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048671104 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2020.3015382

Enabling Drones in the Internet of Things With Decentralized Blockchain-Based Security

2020· article· en· W3048671104 on OpenAlexaff
Abbas Yazdinejad, Reza M. Parizi, Ali Dehghantanha, Hadis Karimipour, Gautam Srivastava, Mohammed Aledhari

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsBrandon UniversityUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDroneComputer scienceComputer securityArchitectureThe InternetNetwork packetSecurity analysisLeverage (statistics)Authentication (law)BlockchainComputer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is currently widespread use of drones and drone technology due to their rising applications that have come into fruition in the military, safety surveillance, agriculture, smart transportation, shipping, and delivery of packages in our Internet-of-Things global landscape. However, there are security-specific challenges with the authentication of drones while airborne. The current authentication approaches, in most drone-based applications, are subject to latency issues in real time with security vulnerabilities for attacks. To address such issues, we introduce a secure authentication model with low latency for drones in smart cities that looks to leverage blockchain technology. We apply a zone-based architecture in a network of drones, and use a customized decentralized consensus, known as drone-based delegated proof of stake (DDPOS), for drones among zones in a smart city that does not require reauthentication. The proposed architecture aims for positive impacts on increased security and reduced latency on the Internet of Drones (IoD). Moreover, we provide an empirical analysis of the proposed architecture compared to other peer models previously proposed for IoD to demonstrate its performance and security authentication capability. The experimental results clearly show that not only does the proposed architecture have low packet loss rate, high throughput, and low end-to-end delay in comparison to peer models but also can detect 97.5% of attacks by malicious drones while airborne.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations217
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityFrench-language works237,207