Cross-Chain Digital Asset System for Secure Trading and Payment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Blockchain as a ledger technology is attractive without the need for central servers. There are many types of blockchains in different fields, such as digital asset trading and payment, which have business interactions. In the fields, the digital asset and payment information on their blockchains need to be securely cooperative with each other. However, some business activities are on different blockchains, which have different consensus algorithms and network architectures, thus limiting the interoperability among these activities and making each blockchain an island. Cross-chain technology can connect different blockchains and realize the interoperability and sharing of information among them. This work designs a cross-chain digital asset system for secure trading and payment. It builds two parallel chains, i.e., digital asset chain (DAC) and payment chain (PC), and their functions are analyzed and designed. The cross-chain, i.e., relay chain (RC), is used to realize cross-chain interoperability, where the cross-chain message format and authority setting are designed to endow parallel chains with the ability to recognize. The decentralized characteristic of the RC allows cross-chain messages to be safely transmitted to ensure secure trading and payment. Through testing and analysis, the proposed system can provide more secure trading and payment than its peers.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".