...
With good demonstrations and graphics, this document will assist people in deciding what resources and what parts of a system to place in blockchain and what parts do not need to be. By providing the actual scenarios, it gives good examples of strong and weak systems that can be used.
WangSiris, X., Yang, WV.A., NoorDimopoulos, SD., ChenFotiou, CN., GuoVoulgaris, MS., & van DamPolyzos, KG.HC. (2019 May). Blockchain-based Interledger smart contract for energy demand management. Energy Procedia, 158, 2719-2724. Retrieved from contracts for decentralized authorization to constrained things. https://wwwarxiv.sciencedirect.comorg/science/article/pii/S1876610219311063
This paper discusses the feasibility of a system of automated trading of power resources utilizing blockchain as the trading medium. The authors present the different electrical demand profiles of residential, commercial and industrial users and propose a game theory model which aligns the goals of all users to reduce their load, thereby saving money. In addition to the demand being requested through the blockchain to the utility provider, they present a case study in which users in a microgrid can make spot-trades based on changing needs on a daily basis.
The authors received financial support for the project through a grant provided by the Ministry of Education Academic Research Fund of Singapore. The authors are very credible on the subject as some of them have several other publications on the same subject matter. The source is neutral in its presentation of both the current stated of blockchain ability to support the ideas presented, as well as the challenges that will be faced. They even note the limitations the current infrastructure that will limit the adoption of the ideas presented.
This source is very helpful because it tackles a subject which is assumed to be best managed by large utilities and governments. It gives a new perspective that the users in a system will best manage demand when given the ability to make choices and save money. The idea of placing smart contracts with demand into an open market to be filled by those that have excess can be helpful in many different projects.
Wang, Y., Bracciali, A., Li, T., Li, F., Cui, X., & Zhao, M. (2019) Randomness invalidates criminal smart contracts. Information Sciences, 477, 291-301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2018.10.057
This paper discusses the use of random factors based on PublicLeaks to minimize the ability of those using smart contracts for criminal activities. While it talks of the mitigation of criminal acts via smart contracts it does not give guarantees, but instead looks at them from a risk management viewpoint.
Much of the paper works upon the idea of entering additional factors such randomness. While this may prove somewhat effective the statement of, “As with real-world crimes, CSCs are not as powerful as assumed.” Is not an overly realistic view. Another statement concerning machine learning as an additional method for ferreting out criminal activities and disallowing their usage of the system is actually a far more effective and realistic method for control.
This source has helped me with a better understanding of both sides concerning both legal and illegal applications of smart contracts. While the authors believe in the usage of smart contracts as a way to improve trust in blockchain transactions via adding randomness, they also feel more must be done to ensure their legitimate non-criminal usage.
After discussing various negative tradeoff issues concerning the offloading of blockchain smart contract authorization from constrained Internet of Thing (IoT) devices to a single authorization server (i.e. execution costs, delays, data reduction), authors state their ambition of presenting designs that more effectively perform this task instead utilizing multiple authorization servers (AS). The stated intention for resolving these tradeoffs is to exemplify constrained IoT device interconnection using a decentralized authorization method with multiple blockchains that constitute two interledger mechanisms.
The level of deliberation appears to be meant for those that have already obtained intermediate to advanced knowledge of blockchain, smart contracts, and constrained IoT devices. However, with some additional research, a reader with novice awareness of these subjects would be able to follow and learn more about the aspects of the presented issue. Further, despite a compelling presentation and references listed at the end of the writing, my attention was drawn to the lack of cited sources listed in the article. This absence was initially noted upon reading the Introduction section, which proposed claims of high computation costs, transaction fees, and delays that occur with the utilization of Ethereum as Bitcoin.
I did find the report to be educational as to the various processes involved while implementing blockchain smart contracts in conjunction with constrained IoT devices. What’s more, is I have been persuaded that experimenting with the interconnection of multiple blockchains to improve smart contract efficiency is a worthy pursuit.
Wang, X., Yang, W., Noor, S., Chen, C., Guo, M., & van Dam, K.H. (2019). Blockchain-based smart contract for energy demand management. Energy Procedia, 158, 2719-2724. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876610219311063
This paper discusses the feasibility of a system of automated trading of power resources utilizing blockchain as the trading medium. The authors present the different electrical demand profiles of residential, commercial and industrial users and propose a game theory model which aligns the goals of all users to reduce their load, thereby saving money. In addition to the demand being requested through the blockchain to the utility provider, they present a case study in which users in a microgrid can make spot-trades based on changing needs on a daily basis.
The authors received financial support for the project through a grant provided by the Ministry of Education Academic Research Fund of Singapore. The authors are very credible on the subject as some of them have several other publications on the same subject matter. The source is neutral in its presentation of both the current stated of blockchain ability to support the ideas presented, as well as the challenges that will be faced. They even note the limitations the current infrastructure that will limit the adoption of the ideas presented.
This source is very helpful because it tackles a subject which is assumed to be best managed by large utilities and governments. It gives a new perspective that the users in a system will best manage demand when given the ability to make choices and save money. The idea of placing smart contracts with demand into an open market to be filled by those that have excess can be helpful in many different projects.
Wang, Y., Bracciali, A., Li, T., Li, F., Cui, X., & Zhao, M. (2019) Randomness invalidates criminal smart contracts. Information Sciences, 477, 291-301. Westerkamp, J., Victor, F., & Küpper. (2019 January). Tracing manufacturing processes using blockchain-based token compositions. Digital Communications and Networks, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcanins.20192018.01.007 | Full text10.057
This paper discusses the
...
use of random factors based on PublicLeaks to minimize the ability of those using smart contracts for criminal activities. While it talks of the mitigation of criminal acts via smart contracts it does not give guarantees, but instead looks at them from a risk management viewpoint.
Much of the paper works upon the idea of entering additional factors such randomness. While this may prove somewhat effective the statement of, “As with real-world crimes, CSCs are not as powerful as assumed.” Is not an overly realistic view. Another statement concerning machine learning as an additional method for ferreting out criminal activities and disallowing their usage of the system is actually a far more effective and realistic method for control.
This source has helped me with a better understanding of both sides concerning both legal and illegal applications of smart contracts. While the authors believe in the usage of smart contracts as a way to improve trust in blockchain transactions via adding randomness, they also feel more must be done to ensure their legitimate non-criminal usage.
Westerkamp, J., Victor, F., & Küpper. (2019 January). Tracing manufacturing processes using blockchain-based token compositions. Digital Communications and Networks, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcan.2019.01.007 | Full text
This paper discusses the current traceability that exists in modern supply chains as well as the mechanisms that provide provenance in both manufacturing and high value goods. The authors contend that in today's world, there is more demand by consumers to not only know the source of the end product, but also the source of its components. The authors propose a prototypical implementation of a supply chain traceability system that models the manufacturing process as token recipes. These recipes take source tokens as inputs to make a completed product.
The authors all have a multitude of publications and are fro the University of Berlin. Based on the subject matter of the other publications, they seem highly credible to weigh in on this topic. The source is neutral in its presentation of both the current stated of manufacturing traceability as well as in the presentation of their solution.
This source would be extremely helpful in the implementation of a traceability system in any manufacturing which requires the knowledge of the source of components that make up a finished product. The examples that were given were clear and can aid in implementing of any manufacturing project.
Yoo, M., & Won, Y. (2018 November). A study on the transparent price tracing system in supply chain management based on blockchain. Sustainability 2018, 10 (4037), https://doi:10.3390/su10114037
This article discusses the usage and application of smart contracts to increase transparency in supply chain management systems. By keeping all aspects of the supply chain, including all applicable costs open to view, the authors believe that consumers and manufacturers alike will benefit. The theory was applied in a testbed setting, the authors hope to apply the test to SCM in actual operation in the future.
The research received no outside funding but was supported by the Korean Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT). Given that this was a test run of their theory, the overall concept shows promise. They do point out specific strengths and weaknesses concerning both blockchain and the usage of smart contracts.
Although transparency is a solid goal for all transactions, the idea that imposition can be made upon businesses to only look for appropriate levels of profit shows a lack of business understanding. “...we propose a price tracing system that can prevent wholesale firms from making extra profits by automating some transactions and integrating them, thus making the pricing information in the SCM transparent.”
Zakhary, V., Agrawal, D., & El Abbadi, A. (2019 September). Transactional smart contracts in blockchain systems. https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.06494v1 | Full text
By detailing the incongruities within smart contract programming efforts, authors introduce the concept of the Transactional Smart Contract (TXSC) framework as a resolution. Issues of concurrency control and isolation anomalies are defined in the paper concerning the two circumstantial blockchain occurrences of Single Domain Transactional Functions (SDTF) and Cross-Domain Distributed Transactional Functions (CDTF).
Specific program examples of these problems are cited and impartially reviewed, with detailed explanations given of blockchain processes as they are unraveled to explore solutions. The article goes on to explain the role of the Database Management System (DBMS) to support ACID (atomic, consistent, isolated, and durable) properties within a blockchain, and how the TXSC framework can supplement this process to resolve complications through the implementation of proper transactional semantics.
With proof of concept (PoC) examples referenced, I found this writing to be enlightening as to the need for comprehensive semantics and framework standardization requirements for blockchain transactions. It appears the practices detailed are likely applicable within actualized use-case scenarios. As a whole, the report seems to be geared toward examination by those with intermediate and advanced knowledge of blockchain transactional application but could be followed by a layman within minimal research into the subject.
Annotated Bibliography - Example format
- 2 to 4 sentences to summarize the main idea(s) of the source.
- What are the main arguments?
- What is the point of this book/article?
- What topics are covered?
- 1 or 2 sentences to assess and evaluate the source.
- How does it compare with other sources in your bibliography?
- Is this information reliable?
- Is the source objective or biased?
- 1 or 2 sentences to reflect on the source.
- Was this source helpful to you?
- How can you use this source for your research project?
- Has it changed how you think about your topic?
Links to articles for possible inclusion and addition, please read articles of interest and create associated annotations.
Brammertz, W., & Mendelowitz, A.I. (2017 September). From digital currencies to digital finance: the case for a smart financial contract standard. The Journal of Risk Finance, 19 (1), 76-92. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JRF-02-2017-0025/full/html
Liu, X., Muhammad, K., Lloret, J., Chen, Y., Yuan, S. (2019). Elastic and cost-effective carrier architecture for smart contract in blockchain. Future Generation Computer Systems, 100, 590-599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2019.05.042
The authors all have a multitude of publications and are fro the University of Berlin. Based on the subject matter of the other publications, they seem highly credible to weigh in on this topic. The source is neutral in its presentation of both the current stated of manufacturing traceability as well as in the presentation of their solution.
This source would be extremely helpful in the implementation of a traceability system in any manufacturing which requires the knowledge of the source of components that make up a finished product. The examples that were given were clear and can aid in implementing of any manufacturing project.
Zakhary, V., Agrawal, D., & El Abbadi, A. (2019 September). Transactional smart contracts in blockchain systems. https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.06494v1 | Full text
By detailing the incongruities within smart contract programming efforts, authors introduce the concept of the Transactional Smart Contract (TXSC) framework as a resolution. Issues of concurrency control and isolation anomalies are defined in the paper concerning the two circumstantial blockchain occurrences of Single Domain Transactional Functions (SDTF) and Cross-Domain Distributed Transactional Functions (CDTF).
Specific program examples of these problems are cited and impartially reviewed, with detailed explanations given of blockchain processes as they are unraveled to explore solutions. The article goes on to explain the role of the Database Management System (DBMS) to support ACID (atomic, consistent, isolated, and durable) properties within a blockchain, and how the TXSC framework can supplement this process to resolve complications through the implementation of proper transactional semantics.
With proof of concept (PoC) examples referenced, I found this writing to be enlightening as to the need for comprehensive semantics and framework standardization requirements for blockchain transactions. It appears the practices detailed are likely applicable within actualized use-case scenarios. As a whole, the report seems to be geared toward examination by those with intermediate and advanced knowledge of blockchain transactional application but could be followed by a layman within minimal research into the subject.
Annotated Bibliography - Example format
- 2 to 4 sentences to summarize the main idea(s) of the source.
- What are the main arguments?
- What is the point of this book/article?
- What topics are covered?
- 1 or 2 sentences to assess and evaluate the source.
- How does it compare with other sources in your bibliography?
- Is this information reliable?
- Is the source objective or biased?
- 1 or 2 sentences to reflect on the source.
- Was this source helpful to you?
- How can you use this source for your research project?
- Has it changed how you think about your topic?
Links to articles for possible inclusion and addition, please read articles of interest and create associated annotations.
Brammertz, W., & Mendelowitz, A.I. (2017 September). From digital currencies to digital finance: the case for a smart financial contract standard. The Journal of Risk Finance, 19 (1), 76-92. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JRF-02-2017-0025/full/html
Hartel, P., & Schumi, R. (2019 September. Gas limit aware mutation testing of smart contracts at scale. https://fr.arxiv.org/abs/1909.12563
Liu, X., Muhammad, K., Lloret, J., Chen, Y., Yuan, S. (2019). Elastic and cost-effective carrier architecture for smart contract in blockchain. Future Generation Computer Systems, 100, 590-599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2019.05.042
Macrinici, D., Cartofeanu, C., & Gao, S. (2018 October). Smart contract applications within blockchain technology: a systematic mapping study. Telematics and Informatics, 35, 2337-2354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.10.004
Siris, V.A., Dimopoulos, D., Fotiou, N., Voulgaris, S., & Polyzos, G.C. (2019 May). Interledger smart contracts for decentralized authorization to constrained things. https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.01671
Yoo, M., & Won, Y. (2018 November). A study on the transparent price tracing system in supply chain management based on blockchain. Sustainability 2018, 10 (4037), https://doi:10.3390/su10114037
Additional articles on Interoperability not yet noted in this Confluence page
...