MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401387452 · doi:10.1109/tnsm.2024.3438621

SATI: Sidechain-Based Access Control & Trust Mechanism for IoT Networks

2024· article· en· W4401387452 on OpenAlexaff
Aditya Pathak, Irfan Al‐Anbagi, Howard J. Hamilton

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAccess controlComputer networkMechanism (biology)Control (management)Internet of ThingsComputer securityDistributed computingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Providing low latency, high security, and high resource utilization for Internet of Things (IoT) networks is challenging due to the heterogeneous nature of these networks and the need for more standardization in security algorithms. Current edge computing-based IoT solutions decrease network latency and improve resource utilization but do not provide adequate security because they offer multiple attack surfaces for adversaries. Recent work uses blockchain technology to provide better security in IoT networks. However, blockchain-based solutions suffer from scalability problems and can increase latency. Sidechains are parallel blockchain networks typically used to increase the scalability of blockchain networks. We propose a novel Sidechain-based Access control and Trust evaluation mechanism for IoT networks (SATI) to decrease network latency and improve scalability, security, and energy efficiency. SATI uses a sidechain with the blockchain network to improve its scalability. It also uses edge computing to provide low network latency and high resource utilization in terms of CPU and memory usage. In addition, trust evaluation and attribute-based access control mechanisms are used to improve the security of the IoT network. We compare our work with existing mechanisms in terms of scalability, security, latency, and CPU and memory usage. In addition, we perform a formal security analysis of the SATI mechanism using reduction-based analysis and the Scyther verification tool.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Network and Service ManagementSame topicBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityFrench-language works237,207