Machine Learning for Blockchain Data Analysis: Progress and Opportunities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Blockchain technology has rapidly emerged to mainstream attention. At the same time, its publicly accessible, heterogeneous, massive-volume, and temporal data are reminiscent of the complex dynamics encountered during the last decade of big data. Unlike any prior data source, blockchain datasets encompass multiple layers of interactions across real-world entities, e.g., human users, autonomous programs, and smart contracts. Furthermore, blockchain’s integration with cryptocurrencies has introduced financial aspects of unprecedented scale and complexity, such as decentralized finance, stablecoins, non-fungible tokens, and central bank digital currencies. These unique characteristics present opportunities and challenges for machine learning on blockchain data. On the one hand, we examine the state-of-the-art solutions, applications, and future directions associated with leveraging machine learning for blockchain data analysis critical for improving blockchain technology, such as e-crime detection and trends prediction. On the other hand, we shed light on blockchain’s pivotal role by providing vast datasets and tools that can catalyze the growth of the evolving machine learning ecosystem. This article is a comprehensive resource for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers, offering a roadmap for navigating this dynamic and transformative field.
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 | 0.016 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".