Metaverse Key Technologies and Blockchains: Impacts & Considerations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As of October 2021, Facebook officially renamed itself Meta, and social networks and three-dimensional (3D) virtual worlds have adopted Metaverse as a new model. The metaverse offers consumers 3D immersive and individualized experiences through various innovative technologies. Although the metaverse is widely popular and beneficial, protecting user data and digital material is a natural concern where the transparency, decentralization, and immutability of blockchain make it a conclusive answer in this aspect. We intend to present the impact of blockchains on different metaverse key technologies and their applications. The work proves the technical challenges of the metaverse in each perspective and emphasizes the importance of blockchains. The article investigates blockchain's role in different metaverse enablers, such as immersive apps, digital twins (DTs), the Internet of Things (IoT), big data, and artificial intelligence (AI). This article shows the blockchain's role in metaverse applications and services. Finally, we describe promising directions for future study, innovation, and development that will enable blockchain to be applied to the metaverse.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".