MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409603190 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-109

Shared Supply Chain: Strategy Selection and Optimization for Blockchain Technology Implementation Methods

2025· article· en· W4409603190 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYoung Scientists FundNatural Science Foundation for Young Scientists of Shanxi ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBlockchainSupply chainSelection (genetic algorithm)Computer scienceSupply chain optimizationSupply chain managementBusinessArtificial intelligenceComputer securityMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Upon the arrival of the sharing consumption model, guaranteeing the authenticity of products and the transparency of transactions has emerged as fundamental challenges hindering the industry's progression.This paper explores the selection and optimization of blockchain technology implementation methods within the shared supply chain.Through a comparative analysis of nonblockchain, private blockchain, and distributed application models, our findings reveal that distributed application generates higher profits when consumers exhibit high sensitivity to blockchain performance and when such performance adheres to specific standards.Conversely, the private blockchain is more suited to customized requirements.Blockchain technology not only increases prices and transparency but also enhances consumer trust, particularly within the distributed application framework.Performance plays a crucial role in decision-making, with the private blockchain relying on corporate investment for optimization and distributed application being constrained by the limitations of the public chain.Based on these findings, it is recommended that enterprises adopt a flexible approach in selecting the most appropriate mode according to their unique needs.Additionally, they should prioritize technological innovation, strive to improve blockchain performance, consider fostering consumer trust, and promote collaborative development throughout the supply chain.These strategies will collectively contribute to the healthy and sustainable growth of the industry.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing→Same topicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security→French-language works237,207→