Sensing Data Concealment in NFTs: A Steganographic Model for Confidential Cross-Border Information Exchange
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an era dominated by rapid digitalization of sensed data, the secure exchange of sensitive information poses a critical challenge across various sectors. Established techniques, particularly in emerging technologies like the Internet of Things (IoT), grapple with inherent risks in ensuring the confidentiality and integrity of transmitted data. Blockchain technology, known for its decentralized and tamper-resistant characteristics, stands as a reliable solution for secure data exchange. However, the persistent challenge lies in protecting sensitive information amidst evolving digital landscapes. This paper explores the potential of Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs), a manifestation of blockchain technology, as dynamic carriers for diverse forms of sensitive information among businesses beyond their conventional association with art and collectibles. Our solution leverages the immutable NFT data to serve as a secure data pointer, while the mutable NFT data holds sensitive information protected by steganography. This dual approach ensures both data integrity and authorized access, even in the face of evolving digital threats. A performance analysis validates the efficacy of the approach, highlighting its reliability, robustness, and resistance to potential attacks on hidden information, ensuring secure data transmission across industries.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".