Automated mechanism to support trade transactions in smart contracts with upgrade and repair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In our previous research, we addressed the problem of automated transformation of models, represented using the business process model and notation (BPMN) standard, into the methods of a smart contract. The transformation supports BPMN models that contain complex multi-step activities that are supported using our concept of multi-step nested trade transactions, wherein the transactional properties are enforced by a mechanism generated automatically by the transformation process from a BPMN model to a smart contract. In this paper, we present a methodology for repairing a smart contract that cannot be completed due to events that were not anticipated by the developer and thus prevent the completion of the smart contract. The repair process starts with the original BPMN model fragment causing the issue, providing the modeler with the innermost transaction fragment containing the failed activity. The modeler amends the BPMN pattern on the basis of the successful completion of previous activities. If repairs exceed the inner transaction’s scope, they are addressed using the parent transaction’s BPMN model. The amended BPMN model is then transformed into a new smart contract, ensuring consistent data and logic transitions. We previously developed a tool, called TABS+, as a proof of concept (PoC) to transform BPMN models into smart contracts for nested transactions. This paper describes the tool TABS+ R , developed by extending the TABS+ tool, to allow the repair of smart contracts.
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 | 0.015 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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".