MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Blockchain-Based Transparent Disaster Relief Delivery Assurance

2020· article· en· W3112516568 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

Venue2020 IEEE International Systems Conference (SysCon) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlockchainTransparency (behavior)BusinessEmergency managementGovernment (linguistics)Computer securityBusiness continuityInternet of ThingsInternet privacyComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Blockchain technology presents benefits that change the way business partners interact. This new way of establishing democratic trust encourages business owners to think differently. Disaster relief and aid industries are built on the power of collaborating participants. A very high number of participants in different hierarchies, including donors, charities, disaster victims, insurance companies and government agencies interact under extraordinary circumstances of a disaster and hard times. Establishing a new way of trust brings forward a better disaster recovery. In this paper, we propose a blockchain-based ecosystem. The blockchain-based disaster recovery not only would enhance the basic processes around disaster relief, but also promote the willingness of help by transparency and potential fraud prevention. This new blockchain system introduces an opportunity to be more resilient, to react rapidly, to communicate transparently, and to include new contributors such as IoT.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0020.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.219 · 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