Opportunities, Challenges and Requirements for Use of Blockchain in Unmanned Aircraft Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) have been growing over the past few years and will continue to grow at a faster pace in future. UAS faces many challenges in certification, airspace management, operations, supply chain, and maintenance. Blockchain, defined as a distributed ledger technology for the enterprise that features immutability, traceability, automation, data privacy, and security, can help address some of these challenges. However, blockchain also has certain challenges and is still evolving. Hence it is essential to study on how blockchain can help UAS. G-31 technical committee of SAE International responsible for electronic transactions for aerospace has published AIR 7356 [<span class="xref">1</span>] entitled Opportunities, Challenges and Requirements for use of Blockchain in Unmanned Aircraft Systems Operating below 400ft above ground level for Commercial Use. This paper is a teaser for AIR 7356 [<span class="xref">1</span>] document. It presents the current opportunities, challenges of UAS operating at or below 400 ft Above Ground Level (AGL) altitude for commercial use and how blockchain can help meet these challenges. It also provides requirements for developing a blockchain solution for UAS along with the need for the standardization of blockchain enabled processes.</div></div>
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".