MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

AI-Based Framework for Classifying Cryptocurrency Exchanges through Transaction Feature Analysis

2025· article· en· W7084076375 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiological Research and Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsTellabs (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCryptocurrencyDatabase transactionMoney launderingGraphFeature (linguistics)Set (abstract data type)Relational databaseEnsemble learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Money laundering through cryptocurrencies has been increasing in recent years. To prevent the misuse of virtual assets for money laundering, we perform exchange classification. In this paper, we introduce an AI-based framework that automatically classifies cryptocurrency exchanges by utilizing wallet addresses and transaction data. Specifically, we collected approximately 2 million wallet addresses and transaction data for 50 exchanges. To address the limitations of single models and maximize classification performance, we applied Graph AI models, including the Heterogeneous Graph Attention Network and the Relational Graph Convolutional Network, in combination with ensemble techniques. As a result, our proposed frameworks achieved an average F1-score of 0.8676 across the 50 exchanges. Furthermore, this framework significantly improves the accuracy of tracking wallets involved in cryptocurrency crimes and fosters stronger cooperation with exchanges. The key contributions of this study include the following: 1) Tackling the understudied problem of exchange classification for anti-money laundering, 2) Developing a high-quality labeled dataset of exchange wallet addresses and transactions, and 3) Designing an effective feature set and graph AI approach for exchange classification based on transaction pattern analysis. Ultimately, our extensive experimental results demonstrate the potential for improving cryptocurrency crime detection and recovery through advanced AI techniques.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 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 topicBiological Research and Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207