Using software product lines to create blockchain products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, blockchain has been growing rapidly from a niche technology to a promising solution for many sectors, due to its unique properties that empower the design of innovative applications. Nevertheless, the development of blockchain applications is still a challenge. Due to the technological novelty, only a few developers are familiar with blockchain technologies and smart contracts. Others might face a steep learning curve or difficulties to reuse existing code to build blockchain applications. This study proposes a novel approach to tackle these issues, through software product line engineering. To support the approach, a web platform to configure and generate a blockchain application for on-chain traceability is introduced. First, a feature model has been designed to model core features of the chosen domain, based on the existing literature. Then, a configurator has been implemented to support the feature selection phase. Finally, a generator is able to ingest such configurations to generate on-the-shelf blockchain products. The generalizability of the contribution is validated by reproducing on-chain traceability applications proposed in the literature by using the platform. This work provides the first evidence that the implementation of blockchain applications using software product lines enhances the quality of produced applications and reduces the time to market.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".