MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184550865 · doi:10.1142/s0218126622500104

Storage and Proximity Management for Centralized Personal Health Records Using an IPFS-Based Optimization Algorithm

2021· article· en· W3184550865 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

VenueJournal of Circuits Systems and Computers · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Data Security Solutions
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSingle point of failureComputer networkFile systemConfidentialityDistributed hash tableComputer securityHash functionDistributed File SystemPeer-to-peerOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Centralized Personal Health Records (PHR) are mutable with compromised security as it may lead to a single point of failure. Confidentiality, protection and security are the common issues in clinical record frameworks. Specific security and protection schemes are being used to secure clinical records. Accordingly, using the Interplanetary File System (IPFS), a decentralized PHR can be maintained to allow patients to access their records without delay. Moreover, a Kademlia-based distributed hash table provides fault tolerance and enables patients to keep track of their medical history. However, a significant issue in IPFS is data availability. It is only available on the web until users or hosts of the network request each peer, later it leads to a permanent loss of data. We propose an architecture that aims to provide faster retrieval and constant PHR availability using Blockchain and IPFS. The results show that an optimal node is selected in each iteration amongst all the available adjacent nodes.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.533
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.242 · 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