Heterogeneous Blockchain and AI-Driven Hierarchical Trust Evaluation for 5G-Enabled Intelligent Transportation Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fifth-generation (5G) wireless communication technology enables high-reliability and low-latency communications for the Intelligent Transportation System (ITS). However, the growingly sophisticated attacks against 5G-enabled ITS (5G-ITS) might cause serious damages to the valuable data generated by various ITS applications. Therefore, establishing a secure 5G-ITS through trust evaluation against potential threats has become a key objective. Furthermore, as a distributed shared ledger and database, Blockchain has the characteristics of non-tampering, traceability, openness and transparency, can support both trust storage and trust verification for trust evaluation. In this paper, we propose a heterogeneous Blockchain based Hierarchical Trust Evaluation strategy, named BHTE, utilizing the federated deep learning technology for 5G-ITS. Specifically, the trusts of ITS users and task distributers are evaluated using the federated deep learning and hierarchical incentive mechanisms are designed for reasonable and fair rewards and punishments. Moreover, the trusts of ITS users and task distributers are stored on heterogeneous and hierarchical blockchains for trust verification. The extensive experiment results show that: (i) the proposed BHTE can achieve reasonable and fair trust evaluations on both ITS users and task distributers; (ii) the BHTE performs excellently with high system throughput and low latency.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".