Elevating e-health excellence with IOTA distributed ledger technology: Sustaining data integrity in next-gen fog-driven systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ensuring data integrity is crucial for IoT-based healthcare and emotion care services, which utilize Fog computing to bring resources and services closer to the network edge. This proximity, however, increases the risks of data tampering, loss, and unauthorized access. To mitigate these risks, Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) platforms such as Hash graph, Big chain-DB, IOTA (Internet of Things Application) and Blockchain are being investigated for their potential to enhance data integrity within Fog computing environments. This study presents a framework designed to ensure data integrity in IoT-based healthcare and emotion care services by leveraging IOTA technology. IOTA, which employs a directed a-cyclic graph (DAG) structure known as the Tangle, provides a secure, decentralised and tamper-resistant method for data storage and sharing. Unlike traditional blockchain, IOTA’s consensus mechanism operates without miners, offering improved scalability and efficiency suitable for IoT environments. Our proposed framework exploits IOTA’s capabilities to deliver a robust solution for maintaining data integrity in Fog computing contexts. The evaluation results demonstrate the framework’s feasibility and effectiveness in enhancing data integrity for IoT-based healthcare and emotion care services. Although IOTA significantly improves data integrity by complicating unauthorized data alterations, it is essential to acknowledge that complete immutability is influenced by various factors, such as consensus mechanisms and the number of network participants, similar to the limitations observed in other DLTs. • Integrating Fog Computing with Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) utilizing IOTA. • Leveraging the “Immutable Data Tangle” structure to safeguard data against unauthorized modifications and tampering. • Fortifying Resilience against Security Threats using DLT (IOTA). • Provides insights into the effectiveness of hybrid cryptanalytic attacks and the role of DLT (IOTA) integration in countering them. • Practical implementations are meticulously presented, accompanied by real-world case studies.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".