Integration of Blockchain in Accounting and ESG Reporting: A Systematic Review from an Oracle-Based Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Bitcoin network is a sophisticated accounting system that facilitates consensus and verification of transactions through cryptographic proof, eliminating the need for a central authority. Given its success, the underlying technology, generally referred to as blockchain, has been proposed as a means to improve legacy accounting and reporting systems. However, integrating real-world data into a blockchain requires the use of oracles: third-party systems that, if poorly selected, may be less decentralized and transparent, potentially undermining the expected benefits. Through a systematic review of the existing literature, this study investigates whether research articles on the integration of blockchain technology in accounting and reporting have addressed the limitations posed by oracles, under the rationale that the omission of oracles constitutes a theoretical bias. Furthermore, this study examines oracle-based solutions proposed for reporting applications and classifies them based on their intended purpose. While the overall consideration of oracles remains limited, the findings indicate a steadily increasing interest in their role and implications within accounting, auditing, and ESG-related blockchain implementations. This growing attention is particularly evident in ESG reporting, where permissioned blockchains and attestation mechanisms are increasingly being examined as practical responses to data verification challenges.
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 | 0.009 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".