MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409791178 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127a-431

Research on Higher Vocational Education Resource Sharing System Incorporating Edge Computing in the Perspective of “Blockchain+Education”

2025· article· en· W4409791178 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlockchainPerspective (graphical)Vocational educationEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionShared resourceResource (disambiguation)Computer scienceKnowledge managementSociologyComputer securityPedagogyComputer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study focuses on the "blockchain + education" perspective, focusing on the integration of edge computing in the higher education resource sharing system.Through the benign interaction between blockchain and edge computing in the system data management system, the security and ef iciency of data storage and transmission of shared resources in the system can be improved.In order to improve the performance of the system's educational resource sharing, this paper utilizes the node identi ication model on the basis of the traditional PBFT consensus algorithm for the selection of master nodes and the monitoring of malicious nodes.Meanwhile, in order to ensure the balanced allocation of educational resources within the sharing system as much as possible, this paper utilizes the differential evolution (DE) algorithm for the balanced allocation of system resources and the educational resources within the system.The results of experiments and system tests show that the improved PBFT consensus algorithm (NR-PBFT) in this paper shows obvious superiority in tests such as throughput and latency.Although the educational resource allocation model performs poorly in the allocation of resources with larger technology such as digital books, the results for the allocation of teacher resources can effectively prove the effectiveness of the resource allocation model in this paper.In addition, the system test results also show that the system in this paper has good performance, and the introduction of edge computing can signi icantly reduce the packet loss rate of resource sharing, which has considerable application value.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 ComputingSame topicMedical Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207