MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The AI-driven Permissioned Blockchain System for the Services of Future Internet of Things

2023· article· en· W4391184506 on OpenAlexaff
Dajun Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBlockchainScalabilityQuality of serviceAdaptabilityInternet of ThingsBlock (permutation group theory)Computer networkDistributed computingProtocol (science)Bandwidth (computing)Computer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, the Internet of Things (IoT) and blockchain technology have attracted more and more attention. However, given the characteristics of the current blockchain itself, many important issues prevent it from becoming a general platform for IoT to deploy large-scale services. The main problem is how to ensure the scalability of the blockchain system in the dynamically changing IoT scene. Despite numerous studies conducted to address this issue, they failed to account for the dynamic changes in IoT nodes, specifically the addition and deletion of nodes. Instead, they simply opted for a consensus protocol as the presumed optimal solution. In this paper, we employ a permissioned blockchain framework designed for current IoT services. In response to the Quality of Service (QoS) requirements of different IoT nodes, we propose different consensus protocols for different service qualities in the existing IoT architecture, aiming to enhance the adaptability of the blockchain to the different needs of users in the IoT system. First, we quantified several permissioned consensus protocols. Furthermore, IoT services require the selection of block producers possessing significant computing resources, along with the dynamic allocation of network bandwidth specifically for the blockchain. We present an approach where we formulate the joint optimization problem of the selection of consensus mechanism and block producer, and the allocation of available bandwidth. We employ the Dueling Deep Q-network (DDQN) method as a solution for this problem.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityFrench-language works237,207