MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410863842 · doi:10.1145/3737874

An End to End Analysis of Crypto Scams on Ethereum

2025· article· en· W4410863842 on OpenAlex
Jadyn Kimber, Enrico Branca, Andrei Natadze, Natalia Stakhanova

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Internet Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEnd-to-end principleComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing number of Ethereum scams is causing significant concern within the blockchain community, costing users millions of dollars annually. Yet, our understanding of how these scams operate remains limited. In this study, we present the first end-to-end analysis of crypto scams using a large set of malicious Ethereum accounts as a case study. We examine the tactics these scams employ on social media platforms to deceive users and convince them to transfer funds to malicious accounts. Our analysis explores the full life cycle of these scams, considering both their distribution through social media and their activity on the Ethereum blockchain. We identify several unique aspects of Ethereum phishing scams that have not been documented in prior literature and find that these scams generally persist significantly longer and result in greater financial losses compared to traditional phishing scams studied in earlier research.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.727

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.271 · 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