MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386783384 · doi:10.9734/jsrr/2023/v29i91786

Exploring the Landscape of Decentralized Autonomous Organizations: A Comprehensive Review of Blockchain Initiatives

2023· review· en· W4386783384 on OpenAlex
Oluwaseun Oladeji Olaniyi, Samuel Oladiipo Olabanji, Olalekan Jamiu Okunleye

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Scientific Research and Reports · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsIndependent Electricity System Operator
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlockchainSmart contractBusinessProcess managementControl (management)Knowledge managementComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study aims to investigate the DAO initiative and scrutinize the diverse methodologies researchers employ for data collection in this area, highlighting any unresolved problems or limitations and suggesting approaches to enhance blockchain technology for future investigations. A remarkable blockchain initiative is the decentralized autonomous organization (DAO), a decentralized blockchain technology system that lets people self-govern through self-executing rules. The methodology is a qualitative analysis that uses contractual and business aspects to create a legally binding smart contract for DAO collaborations; thus, SPESC and Symboleo are smart-contract languages (SCL) that can involve IT and non-IT individuals in contract development. Blockchain technology has created Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) that perform autonomously through smart contracts within their ecosystem without the necessity for centralized control or third-party intervention.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.384

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.199
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.198 · 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