MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220789168 · doi:10.4271/2022-01-0002

Best Practices in Establishing Business Case for Implementing Blockchain Solution in Aerospace

2022· article· en· W4220789168 on OpenAlexaff
G. Vijay Kumar, Robert Rencher, Chris Fabre, Dragos Budeanu, Chris Markou, Ken Jones, Ravi Rajamani, Harvey Reed, David Bettenhausen, A. L. Lesmerises, Rhonda Walthall, Narayanan Chidambaran, Sastry Veluri

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE International Journal of Advances and Current Practices in Mobility · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsInternational Air Transport Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlockchainAerospaceParagraphClass (philosophy)Process (computing)Engineering managementComputer scienceBusiness processBusinessProcess managementTelecommunicationsComputer securityEngineeringMarketingWork in processWorld Wide WebArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aircraft asset life cycle processes are rapidly being digitalized. Many novel technologies enabled processes of recording these electronic transactions are being emerged. One such technology for recording electronic transactions securely is Blockchain, defined as distributed ledger technologies which includes enterprise blockchain. Blockchain is not widely used in the aerospace industry due to lack of technical understanding and questions about its benefits. Assessment and establishment of business case for implementing blockchain based solution is needed. The aerospace industry is very conservative when it comes to technology adoption and hence it is difficult to change legacy processes. Additionally, the industry is very fragmented. The technology is advancing at a faster rate and applies across geographies under various regulatory oversight which makes blockchain based solution implementation challenging. G-31 electronic transactions for aerospace standards committee of SAE International has conducted a study on determination of cost benefits from implementing a blockchain solution. This study resulted in development of Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) 6984 and was published recently. This recommended practice lays out a methodology for qualifying and quantifying the benefits of replacing or augmenting a legacy process with a blockchain solution. This paper presents summary and overview of this study and provides a teaser for ARP 6984.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0130.008
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.009

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE International Journal of Advances and Current Practices in MobilitySame topicBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityFrench-language works237,207