Local Trust in Internet of Things Based on Contract Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autonomous trust mechanisms enable Internet of Things (IoT) devices to function cooperatively in a wide range of ecosystems, from vehicle-to-vehicle communications to mesh sensor networks. A common property desired in such networks is a mechanism to construct a secure, authenticated channel between any two participating nodes to share sensitive information, nominally a challenging proposition for a large, heterogeneous network where node participation is constantly in flux. This work explores a contract-theoretic framework that exploits the principles of network economics to crowd-source trust between two arbitrary nodes based on the efforts of their neighbors. Each node in the network possesses a trust score, which is updated based on useful effort contributed to the authentication step. The scheme functions autonomously on locally adjacent nodes and is proven to converge onto an optimal solution based on the available nodes and their trust scores. Core building blocks include the use of Stochastic Learning Automata to select the participating nodes based on network and social metrics, and the formulation of a Bayesian trust belief distribution from the past behavior of the selected nodes. An effort-reward model incentivizes selected nodes to accurately report their trust scores and contribute their effort to the authentication process. Detailed numerical results obtained via simulation highlight the proposed framework's efficacy and performance. The performance achieved near-optimal results despite incomplete information regarding the IoT nodes' trust scores and the presence of malicious or misbehaving nodes. Comparison metrics demonstrate that the proposed approach maximized the overall social welfare and achieved better performance compared to the state of the art in the domain.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".