EtherShield: Time-interval Analysis for Detection of Malicious Behavior on Ethereum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advances in blockchain technology have attracted significant attention across the world. The practical blockchain applications emerging in various domains, ranging from finance, healthcare, and entertainment, have quickly become attractive targets for adversaries. The novelty of the technology coupled with the high degree of anonymity it provides made malicious activities even less visible in the blockchain environment. This made their robust detection challenging. This article presents EtherShield, a novel approach for identifying malicious activity on the Ethereum blockchain. By combining temporal transaction information and contract code characteristics, EtherShield can detect various types of threats and provide insight into the behavior of contracts. The time-interval-based analysis used by EtherShield enables expedited detection, achieving comparable accuracy to other approaches with significantly less data. Our validation analysis, which involved over 15,000 Ethereum accounts, demonstrated that EtherShield can significantly expedite the detection of malicious activity while maintaining high accuracy levels (86.52% accuracy with 1 hour of transaction history data and 91.33% accuracy with 1 year of transaction history data).
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".