Potential Ways for Smart Contract Technology to Improve the Efficiency of Economic Transactions in the Context of Artificial Intelligence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Smart contract technology based on artificial intelligence background is gradually becoming a brand-new path to improve the efficiency of economic transactions due to its unique advantages. This paper initially explores the impact of smart contract technology on economic transaction efficiency through empirical analysis of models and data. The credit mechanism is introduced as an intermediate variable to analyze its mediating effect in the process of improving economic transaction efficiency by smart contract technology. The optimization of Fabric transaction mechanism is realized by using the improved credit model, which further exerts the role of smart contract technology in enhancing economic transaction efficiency. The principal component analysis is used to calculate the comprehensive score of economic transaction efficiency before and after the optimization of smart contract trading mechanism to show the effect of the development of smart contract technology on the improvement of economic transaction efficiency. This paper concludes that the development of smart contract technology will significantly and positively promote the improvement of economic transaction efficiency through benchmark regression analysis, mediation effect test and other methods. After the optimization of smart contract transaction mechanism, the comprehensive score of economic transaction efficiency produces significant improvement compared with the pre-optimization period, in which the average value of the comprehensive score of transaction efficiency in Guangdong, Jiangsu, Shanghai, and Beijing is improved by 20.18%, 24.52%, 33.77%, and 35.54%, respectively. It further indicates that smart contract technology is an effective path to improve economic transaction efficiency.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".