Michael Della Rocca's project in his bold and iconoclastic book1 is to reject all distinction and multiplicity: there is only being. He calls this view strict monism.2 And, as the title of his book indicates, he sees his project as Parmenidean. There are accordingly references to Parmenides throughout the book, as well as a more focused discussion of Parmenides' views in Chapter 1. This is in line with something on which Della Rocca insists in Chapter 7, in keeping with such monism, namely that we should reject any distinction between doing philosophy and doing its history. I share Della Rocca's mistrust of that distinction. But I do not share it for the same reasons nor to the same extent. There seems to me a clear sense in which his project is more fundamentally philosophical than historical. Partly I have in mind the fact that his primary aim is simply to defend strict monism. And I think that the philosophical challenges that he thereby presents us with are more significant than any lessons that he has to teach us about where any given philosopher stands in relation to the view.3 My own focus in what follows will therefore likewise be on the issues themselves, though I too will engage with the work of other philosophers to the extent that I think it is relevant to do so. A preliminary before I proceed. Even the two short paragraphs that I have written so far contain material that is question-begging in this context. An obvious case in point is the very reference to ‘other philosophers’. That is illegitimate in strict monist terms. So too, come to that, are the references to ‘Chapter 1’ and ‘Chapter 7’. My excuse for begging questions in this way is something to which Della Rocca's book itself bears ample witness: anyone who wants to engage seriously with his views has no alternative. One of the issues that we shall need to confront is what this means as far as Della Rocca's own text is concerned. But there is no equivalent issue as far as my text is concerned. True, I would prefer not to beg questions. But, since I am not a strict monist, I feel no other compunction about writing in the way that I have; and I am reassured that I am at least not begging questions against myself. Della Rocca's starting point is the Principle of Sufficient Reason, or the PSR to use his own abbreviation. This is ‘the principle according to which each fact or each thing has an explanation’ (p. xiv). That this is his starting point straightway illustrates what I said in the previous section. For Della Rocca takes the PSR to serve as a basic principle for Parmenides too. As it happens, here already I have exegetical qualms: passages which, on Della Rocca's interpretation, show Parmenides to be rejecting distinctions that, if real, would involve things that could not be explained seem to me to show Parmenides to be rejecting distinctions that, if real, would involve things that could not so much as be.4 But I will not dwell on that. My focus, as I have already indicated, is on the issues themselves. Della Rocca has much to say about the kind of philosophical work that the PSR can do. But the principal work that he wants it to do is to yield strict monism. This is clearest in Chapters 2 to 6 of the book, which he describes as ‘[i]n many ways… [its] heart’ (p. xv). It is Bradley, rather than Parmenides, who plays the rôle of chief mentor in these chapters: Della Rocca uses the PSR to argue, in a broadly Bradleyan way,5 for the unreality of all relations, and thereby for the unreality of all distinctions. The argument assumes different forms in different contexts, but there is a core argument to the effect that any relation must be grounded in its relata, and thereby in the relation of grounding between itself and its relata, and thereby in the relation of grounding between the relation of grounding and itself and its relata, and so on ad infinitum, in a way that the PSR precludes. Objections to the project fall under three main heads. First, there are objections to the PSR. Second, there are objections to the contention that the PSR yields strict monism. Third, there are objections to strict monism. I shall devote a subsection to each, focusing in the third case on to strict it is to a kind of which will me to what we should the PSR on it is The that I in the previous much it not of The the the more to the PSR This is significant Della Rocca's are very in Chapter which is on Della Rocca that there is between the for an of what is and a to that we have kind of of (p. The is that a of what something is must itself we have of that and in that on of that will involve a or an or a it be said to be This seems to me to of have a kind of of But we have an of what a is a a point of which is a given This not of but it There are for the that the PSR is if it is in such a way that of this is to as an There be things of this that should not be to as say what is at is what of given But that is not to the Della Rocca's of the PSR to involve a of if it is to do the work that he wants it to do. it is that, Della Rocca describes the that he is us on as to (p. it throughout a much than that. It is not only of philosophy that a to distinction and So do of the PSR is to all of that if the PSR is to any of that it not do so on it that it be to is what it will do if it on it that are so that its to is more of a to reject than to reject the fact that the in a can be to reject a is itself a to reject the PSR in that A more of the PSR And the well to the all But all the more to reject can be to reject the to which we shall in be Della Rocca has an to the of we should the in the and that he which is the very point that I have namely that a more of the PSR This in Chapter where Della Rocca that any of the PSR yields his fact he that any of the PSR already yields strict monism. My about this argument will in the But, as the fact that his argument in Chapter is an argument for that of the PSR is a to reject Della Rocca will of he will that we say what is with his he in a my argument or sense me that where my argument but should what and I (p. in But it is not a of what anyone True, we do need to say what is with his But before we are in a to do that, we can the basic principle that no argument any given to any given is in itself an argument for that as to an argument against to which of the two it is be a very But there is no more for Della Rocca to way it that we his than there is for us to his the other way it that he his that the material in Chapter is all that Della Rocca has to in of his of the PSR all my references to ‘the will be to this Chapter where his focus is on he his to the of a to (p. a very is the PSR. Della Rocca not be This seems to me to be a of any (p. a that all and only things that are and are as a way of his use of There is a in which the has this for a the to his use of But in the relevant that is in the sense that is relevant to the PSR and that the of his he has the all and only things that are and are it be said to be its own But that would with Della Rocca's against of this kind seem something of a and But us not much of what in to terms. I have the means to in this is not this no can be its own its own on which it is and to this there is no It is It is not but a of the my is but and it not I will not to the of this on that a a of or a of or in a is it for a But this can be in the same way as the point about it is not the for a in the relevant so far as it means something as it not involve any for is it not involve that there is any such The fact that it the with the use to which Della Rocca under that at any not to to a for no a to what of for has no for to the what of it is to if we to the of is to what of can be in the same The fact that what of it is to need in the relevant as a for to the so far as to the means to something as any that doing so be it have no on the of is is not to that it can be the that is is The with the use to which Della Rocca under that Della Rocca his to about reasons in terms. He takes it that, there can be reasons for and against any given these reasons are in which case is at and or has to where the of reasons (p. This is all of his to that are reasons but But this is to us about the of reasons that are that is to say reasons that are nor in or the anyone who is the least to the that a is a to the extent that it is in an is to think that the reasons that a for or against any given are very us to Della Rocca's of this It very much an to on Della Rocca's But it It is the of Chapter of his book that is no to since is what the in Della Rocca's is the PSR. the is to an to it is to an to that the PSR And this a more is on Della Rocca's to the PSR This must of have an if the PSR is as must the of what there is to that is said in to And I do not there can be an that not to or involve or an that not the PSR in As for Della Rocca's of any to that us to Even if he to he to if his are his way of for is This is a significant of the of his And his to issues that are not to that an to would have though much Della Rocca is that there be any and it follows as a of that there be distinction or should there not distinction and is on Della Rocca's to I do not that there is to The issue is there is that is with Della Rocca's strict monism, there is not any such thing as a relation of any such thing as a of that can be in the of that I have point to in this of an different what has It a much discussion than I can but it is the PSR is of the things that has an is the of it in this more than any that the of the to the PSR to But to seriously the that the of has an is already to a of a with an as well as a It is to seriously the of something that will under a kind of and it more As far as own is there is no we should at in such terms. But as far as the of is there is or no that any that can be for the of will have any on the it say that is an it is a what has to think in such terms. There seem to are though I can think of and a of about And if Della Rocca this point that any is that of that will the that there is not only a at the of his but a there too. that in or more of its a relation on its One can this of as a of the a relation would be a as must be (p. It is a point this is an to Della Rocca's argument that the PSR yields strict monism, or it rather as a relation that be explained and therefore to the previous subsection as a to the PSR It is that if the is the there are of the of to say that is to its is not at all to that it can be any case all that at this is the on is which the given is that which the given is given as in is not that is said in a and same but that it is in a and same of all its The of is to these do not have the same and do not the of as the same There are not two as Parmenides' but a of which all its the the the is said in a and same sense of of which it is but that of which it is said it is said of I have already objections to strict monism. this subsection I shall namely that it is to a kind of all the objections that I am to Della Rocca's this seems to me the for to But it issues which I will on to in that is seems in something of the way in which, as the view that is an is that if there is no the that there is is say that is is to say that we between as are not at But what of these as is the at which if the is of it The to the is who that is an and who thereby the of the is not itself and who that is an and who thereby the of the is not itself Della Rocca not that distinction and are an He not that is an there is only being. This is as far as it As I have it Della Rocca not that distinction and are an what he have in a the of to distinction and he for on he to the and for what Della Rocca that he is at to on as he before the that has to and (p. and he will this in to that But it to what to to such given that too, on Della Rocca's are not so much as not have to be all that to think that if he is as he he must be with the same as or not have of that this its if Della Rocca is not as he but only as of a use of that what he would have as and I though it is to be that of the of Chapter which of a is to such a in his use of But his book very of the that we in Chapter For the the in it to philosophical and have the effect that and that seem to be to on of that. it is of Della Rocca's project that these should be as he confront the same in the he the of his book, that anyone who must what he has written as The is that, many many passages which, simply do not and Della Rocca be in a of many passages which, do As these and as has in any case obvious since the of this of the issues Della Rocca's book is what its are for its own That is the issue that I shall in the section. One is that we can any of the or in the book, since if we we would be what illegitimate in strict monist terms. There are two things of which this is each of which is as a for what Della Rocca is The is ad the of such a at least on a are which an that is to be as and which are to be as A is the that there is no to which with the that there is such a and a The thing of which the is is the thing that I the of the previous of what he has written in the as which, in the same he to a the of these the and the the are Even there are between that as though be what is in each case serve its what extent is it in each we are on what to be in though are not to the that are For if we say that, in the of the that there is no to we show that the of the is or if we say that to be have we said something in each is what it to and to be what it to be for the to It is not clear that the to all such questions will be the same in And this in means that there seems to be a significant issue about which of these if is the for what Della Rocca is the of much is what it to given Chapter of Della Rocca's book, which no main and given the rôle that this to in the book and that Della Rocca not us to any of the of the book as what it to that he is not in the book in and that, he and only what he he could in he would have written at But I think this would be For Chapter is not as as it It has a in the book, a and a the a that what he has in the is that must in to if only of that reference to As it Chapter is more an in an the in an But much more there seems to be on Della Rocca's with that there is only to of this that he that all is or that all is True, of these a of which It is not that this as far as the strict monist of what is is It is that, at the very of Chapter his strict monist view that all is Della Rocca that more to And we that we say as such and (p. It seems to that Della Rocca would be to a of what he in the and that all the is material that is to us this I am and if we the that he would be to the and all the the the issue of the or the is the for what he is doing is an issue about the of the It of that Della Rocca's view the issue in strict monist there be any distinction between the and the the material that is to the for Della Rocca describes the that he has on as use a And much on this in with Parmenides, he that as but and as so too Parmenides but and as Della Rocca has the in he in the or for that that it is the for what he is One thing that to show that he has the in mind is his to it is that this is not the for between the and the that it to There is a with its in the a of is itself a of this the of the that there is no that is to is that is a that is to is not anyone who a view of will on a as not And there is for about the or of at in these views is the same as that in the as of there is about these views are in the this that the between and is not in this context. it is not to the of the is the for what Della Rocca is is and what that it is not the for what he is the no in this something to which I shall in the namely the fact that Della not only all of his own he all of what has written or do not the things we and for things could be we the (p. But am I not Della Rocca that the book is a kind of or a kind of in on to to his am I not his the of the to not what he is but what we are is what I am I am to sense of this so far as there is any on Della Rocca's that it has to do with that to And if the book have to do with it is but a philosophical or a philosophical I am to say that I it and There is a in which philosophy that is or Della Rocca is at in to us to I do not he can the of of or I in the previous a between what Della Rocca is doing in this book and what is doing in the Della Rocca is all that has written or is a he which, the we are no to (p. This is in to who the of as are in which we have to is not a of the but the itself in its are not but the that there Della Rocca thereby a that is to not in the philosophical but in the or at the or in the we have the the that I in the previous the that I in mind I of the that Della Rocca's book is a kind of or and are no to in a relation to the we and to to (p. That be all very well where philosophical work is concerned. But Della Rocca think this he the or he his It seems to me that these questions are an for Della But is this simply if he is to us and what to what I have he is about what it takes to he has no to a book of the kind he has and the do not come do these questions of if Della Rocca is can there be any such thing as writing a book, or any such thing as Della And can anyone be to given strict that is but that it in any relation to any and that there be anyone with any to be But us these questions and us to extent we that Della Rocca is to us and that he is about what it takes to should we the previous I of a of passages Della Rocca's book in which he of things But us not be the of the that the thereby Even if what he is us can be as things should we is the to us of things is the to us of I am far that there is no to the what the to us of The the issue that I in with in is there is a that is with Della Rocca's strict monism. has to this all are But this not work to Della Rocca's only are all this is I have what I to be a of questions that Della But if strict is I have not any questions at all and there is no to is if strict is I have not any questions that are not and there is no to that is not and am in much as I have doing throughout this But if what I have doing throughout this is in in is something that I am to have it is what I do I say not I am to strict monism. It is what I do I am in the my It is what the a this me the so be it Della Rocca have any way of the of to us in to this as he must on a strict monist and as he throughout his own in his own I a he to the that is of to us things is of to he will be in a that against the PSR or he will us an of things is of to he that things is of to us it to serve he will have it that much to the of what he is mind that what to serve is not in fact that, but rather things in with the of and he the of things to as he at the of Chapter he will have a significant to the of what he is his own to do that, which have in this way as or no the he follows with he will as he at the of Chapter have to as all there and we shall where we with an issue about what the to us of in my own can my own of which can be in the or the and to I can is that it to serve And I can that that is to be an to such as Della Rocca's book, is thereby to be And, I am at I can it no what I say on a strict monist with the that this is only my of to as thereby in with Della Rocca about what is to the that what I am is and to on the that what I am And I am to on as I and the things that I and and to the philosophical views about these things to which I it can be that strict monism, its are with to a point and there the of we and with The previous subsection in an to the if Della Rocca is about what it takes to And the in that we shall not only but and sense of what to us will us and we shall where we But this be as Della Rocca is about what it takes to he is in about there be any The me that my such and but Della Rocca he is has us with a argument that my And if the where we the there there to with of this the of The where we to be a of and we there must us this to strict thereby a I think this of my can be The very point of that that there is on a strict monist view to us to serve are to be to with but not to the extent that we have to we have to the said in a can any I would any a This seem it is of the in which a his that his he it and the But the of the could against it in a where are no to in a relation to the but are to to And to extent the of a is likewise the same in such a is is with the in the is not that it is but that it not serve the my me something that serve my in if my on the of that my such and and if this is Della Rocca's I do at least I am in the to to what the me and to Della Rocca's if his argument is And I do not what there strict monism, to there is a very the of Della Rocca's book in which he to he in in do things in to a that (p. be this on Della Rocca's is more Even it as though it is an on his to a And this in means that it as it who to and the doing of should it Della Rocca if we do And in any case we can the we can Della Rocca to not what we are but what he is the previous with what follows if Della Rocca is about what it takes to I for reasons given in that he is not about that. I for reasons given in the previous that, if he this that things more to us than The of the point of are a more significant than the of But so could It would be with the to that could not be in which we in the way in the previous section. on this would be to a on the very of since only philosophy is of that we are in that It would have as a that the the For it would that as we something as it to we need to to the such a thing be a which is to questions it is an to what it is and to the what it is is not only but
The certificate system is essential for academic organizations to provide proof of study or the level of skills and education. However, simply providing a physical cert or a virtual cert can be easily forged, and it will be difficult to be verified and authenticated. Many techniques are proposed to protect certificate’s authenticity such as Digital Watermarking Technology, RSA Digital Signature. Furthermore, there are also Blockchain approaches such as integration of existing system and private blockchain. However, those systems have weaknesses such as the vulnerability to be cracked and efficiency in verification of the certificate. The aim of this research is to provide a system that is capable of securing certificate authenticity from activities of certificate fraud. In this research, we proposed a blockchain e-certificate system for academic organization and public to issue and verify e-certificate with a simple web-based user interface. By combining the advantages of using decentralized ledger for key information and utilize IPFS to store the certificate file, it can solve the problem of the vulnerability of the existing system.
У статті досліджено виклики та перспективи, які несе із собою впровадження технології NFT (невзаємозамінних токенів) у сферу інтелектуальної власності. Автор аналізує вплив Четвертої індустріальної революції на актуалізацію потреби в оновленні правового регулювання у цифровому середовищі. Приділена певна увага проблемам піратства, контрафакції, а також труднощам у доведенні авторства у кіберпросторі. У цьому контексті NFT розглядається як [...]Читати далі... from Non-fungible token (NFT): Виклики та перспективи для інтелектуальної власності
This study investigates redistributive spending in China’s governance system, focusing on fiscal decentralization, interjurisdictional competition, and land finance revenue. Using multilevel modeling of data from 283 prefectural cities and 2,862 county-level jurisdictions, it finds that interjurisdictional competition prioritizes developmental spending over redistributive services. No significant relationship is observed between fiscal capacity—measured by tax revenues or intergovernmental transfers—and redistributive expenditures. However, higher land finance revenues are positively linked to increased redistributive spending. The study attributes this development-oriented strategy to the cadre promotion system, where local officials advance their careers by achieving policy goals through competition for economic investments. By integrating land finance into the analysis of redistributive spending, this research highlights its implications for equity and sustainability. It underscores the urgent need for fiscal and social policy reforms to balance developmental priorities with equitable social welfare provision.
This paper investigates the operational patterns and forensic traceability of Bitcoin mixing services, which pose significant challenges to anti-money laundering efforts. We analyze blockchain data using Neo4j to identify unique mixing patterns and potential deanonymization techniques. Our research includes a comprehensive survey of 20 currently available mixing services, examining their features such as input/output address policies, delay options, and security measures. We also analyze three legal cases from the U.S. involving Bitcoin mixers to understand investigative techniques used by law enforcement. We conduct two test transactions and use graph analysis to identify distinct transaction patterns associated with specific mixers, including peeling chains and multi-input transactions. We simulate scenarios where investigators have partial knowledge about transactions, demonstrating how this information can be leveraged to trace funds through mixers. Our findings reveal that while mixers significantly obfuscate transaction trails, certain patterns and behaviors can still be exploited for forensic analysis. We examine current investigative approaches for identifying users and operators of mixing services, primarily focusing on methods that associate addresses with entities and utilize off-chain attacks. Additionally, we discuss the limitations of our approach and propose potential improvements that can aid investigators in applying effective techniques. This research contributes to the growing field of cryptocurrency forensics by providing a comprehensive analysis of mixer operations and investigative techniques. Our insights can assist law enforcement agencies in developing more effective strategies to tackle the challenges posed by Bitcoin mixers in cybercrime investigations.
The study analyzes the global regulatory landscape for blockchain assets, particularly cryptocurrencies and non-fungible tokens, focusing on the motivations behind policymaker actions, the diversity of regulatory approaches, the challenges posed by decentralized technologies and provide future regulatory pathways. The study uses a conceptual and mixed-method approach, combining qualitative and quantitative content analysis of 59 peer-reviewed articles selected through the PRISMA framework. Findings reveal that regulation is primarily driven by concerns over consumer protection, financial stability, anti-money laundering, taxation, and environmental sustainability. Regulatory responses vary widely, ranging from the harmonized MiCA framework in the EU to the fragmented enforcement model in the U.S., along with diverse strategies across Asia. Stablecoins, DeFi, and CBDCs emerge as major regulatory frontiers. The study recommends adopting regulatory sandboxes, promoting international coordination, enforcing environmental standards, and building regulatory capacity in emerging economies to balance innovation with risk mitigation. It also highlights the importance of industry self-regulation and technology-assisted compliance in decentralized finance. The limitation of this study is that it relies solely on secondary data sources, which may limit the accuracy of real-time policy impact assessments. Future research should focus on empirical validation and dynamic policy modeling to enhance global governance of digital assets.
Krishna Nivash. J Krishna Nivash. J, Dr. V. Vijayakumar Dr. V. Vijayakumar
Blockchain Based Cross Network calling is an innovative decentralized peer-to-peer (P2P) communication system leveraging WebRTC and blockchain technology. This paper explores the system architecture, scalability mechanisms, and potential future enhancements. We present an in-depth analysis of its hybrid decentralized architecture, discuss the scalability challenges in P2P networks, and propose future enhancements including Layer-2 blockchain solutions, decentralized signaling, and AI integration. The findings suggest that decentralized audio communication can be significantly improved through advanced architectural designs and optimized scalability solutions. This paper provides a comprehensive exploration of Cross Network-based decentralized communication, emphasizing its implications for privacy, security, and future enhancements in Web3 applications.
الأهداف: يهدف البحث لبيان ماهية الرموز غير القابلة للاستبدال (NFTs)، وتكييفها الفقهي وحكم التعامل بها، وشروط التوثيق من خلالها، كما يهدف إلى توضيح حقيقة (NFTs)، وآلية عملها، ونشأتها، وحكم التعامل بها، وتم اختيار الموضوع نظرا لحداثته، والحاجة الملحة لوضعها في الإطار الفقهي المناسب، وإثراء المكتبة الإسلامية الفقهية على وجه التحديد، بمواضيع شكلت نقلة نوعية في عالم التكنولوجيا، مما يعني مواكبة كل ما يستجد. المنهجية: اعتمد البحث المنهج الوصفي الشارح للنصوص المتعلقة بـ NFTs، والمنهج الاستقرائي باستقراء عمل الرموز تقنيا للتوصل للتعريف الأقرب لطبيعتها، والمنهج التحليلي لتحليل المفاهيم الواردة والآراء المتعلقة بـها، ومناقشتها، وإلحاقها بأقرب التكييفات الفقهية الملائمة. النتائج: إن التكييف الفقهي الملائم لطبيعة عمل هذه الرموز، هو تخريجها على دفتر البياع والصراف، وشريجة البقال، حيث كانت وسائل مناسبة لحفظ الحقوق بحسب ما تعارف عليه أهل ذلك الزمان، وكذا هذه الرموز، فقد تعورف على كونها وسيلة لتوثيق الحقوق في العالم الرقمي، خاصة أنها قد استوفت الشروط الواجب توافرها في التوثيق بالكتابة، من كونها مرسومة ومستبينة، وجازمة، مع مراعاة مجلس العقد، وهي متناغمة كذلك مع الشروط التي أقرتها منظمة التجارة الإلكترونية في العقود الإلكترونية، من الشفافية والاستمرارية وعدم القابلية للتغيير والتبديل. الخلاصة: أن الـ NFTs هي عبارة عن نوع الشبكات اللامركزية تستخدم لإثبات الحقوق والملكيات من خلالها، وتتم عبر شبكات البلوكتشين الإيثيروم- على وجه التحديد، حيث تتوافر فيها الشروط الواجب توافرها في التوثيق بالكتابة برموز خاصة، تتناسب مع معطيات العصر الرقمية، وتوصي الباحثة بمزيد من البحوث على كل ما يستجد حول تلك الرموز لاستيضاح ملابساتها في جميع جوانب استعمالاتها، كما وتوصي بالاستفادة العملية من تجارب الدول في استخدامها، مما يساعد في اكتشاف الثغرات وسدها.
This paper demonstrates that Automated Market Maker (AMM) based markets, such as those using constant product formulas (e.g., Uniswap), are inherently path-dependent. We prove mathematically that the sequence of operations in AMMs determines the final state, challenging the notion that market prices solely reflect information. This property has profound implications for decentralized prediction markets that rely on AMMs for price discovery, as it demonstrates they cannot function as pure "truth machines." Using both mathematical proofs and empirical evidence from ETH/USDC pools, we show that AMM-based markets incorporate historical path information beyond the current market beliefs. Our findings contribute to the understanding of market efficiency, mechanism design, and the interpretation of prices in decentralized finance systems.
Many blockchain-based decentralized services require their validators (operators) to deposit stake (collateral), which is forfeited (slashed) if they misbehave. Restaking networks let validators secure multiple services by reusing stake. These networks have quickly gained traction, leveraging over \$20 billion in stake. However, restaking introduces a new attack vector where validators can coordinate to misbehave across multiple services simultaneously, extracting digital assets while forfeiting their stake only once. Previous work focused either on preventing coordinated misbehavior or on protecting services if all other services are Byzantine and might unjustly cause slashing due to bugs or malice. The first model overlooks how a single Byzantine service can collapse the network, while the second ignores shared-stake benefits. To bridge the gap, we analyze the system as a strategic game of coordinated misbehavior, when a given fraction of the services are Byzantine. We introduce elastic restaking networks, where validators can allocate portions of their stake that may cumulatively exceed their total stake, and when allocations are lost, the remaining stake stretches to cover remaining allocations. We show that elastic networks exhibit superior robustness compared to previous approaches, and demonstrate a synergistic effect where an elastic restaking network enhances its blockchain's security, contrary to community concerns of an opposite effect in existing networks. We then design incentives for tuning validators' allocations. Our elastic restaking system and incentive design have immediate practical implications for deployed restaking networks.
Federated Learning (FL) has recently emerged as a collaborative learning paradigm that can train a global model among distributed participants without raw data exchange to satisfy varying requirements. However, there remain several challenges in managing FL in a decentralized environment, where potential candidates exhibit varying motivation levels and reliability in the FL process management: 1) reconfiguring and automating diverse FL workflows are challenging, 2) difficulty in incentivizing potential candidates with high-quality data and high-performance computing to join the FL, and 3) difficulty in ensuring reliable system operations, which may be vulnerable to various malicious attacks from FL participants. To address these challenges, we focus on the workflow-based methods to automate diverse FL pipelines and propose a novel approach to facilitate reliable FL system operations with robust mechanism design and blockchain technology by considering a contribution model, fair committee selection, dynamic reputation updates, reward and penalty methods, and contract theory. Moreover, we study the optimality of contracts to guide the design and implementation of smart contracts that can be deployed in blockchain networks. We perform theoretical analysis and conduct extensive simulation experiments to validate the proposed approach. The results show that our incentive mechanisms are feasible and can achieve fairness in reward allocation in unreliable environment settings.
Mohammad Mussadiq Jalalzai, Kushal Babel, Jovan Komatovic, Tobias Klenze · 9 authors
This paper introduces MonadBFT, a novel Byzantine Fault Tolerant (BFT) consensus protocol that advances both performance and robustness. MonadBFT is implemented as the consensus protocol in the Monad blockchain. As a HotStuff-family protocol, MonadBFT has linear message complexity in the common case and is optimistically responsive, operating as quickly as the network allows. A central feature of MonadBFT is its tail-forking resistance. In pipelined BFT protocols, when a leader goes offline, the previous proposal is abandoned. Malicious leaders can exploit this tail-forking behavior as a form of Maximal Extractable Value (MEV) attack by deliberately discarding their predecessor's block, depriving that proposer of rewards and enabling transaction reordering, censorship or theft. MonadBFT prevents such tail-forking attacks, preserving both fairness and integrity in transaction execution. Another related feature of MonadBFT is its notion of speculative finality, which enables parties to execute ordered transactions after a single round (i.e., a single view), with reverts occurring only in the rare case of provable leader equivocation. This mechanism reduces user-perceived latency. Additionally, we introduce the leader fault isolation property, which ensures that the protocol can quickly recover from a failure. To our knowledge, no prior pipelined, leader-based BFT consensus protocol combines all of these properties in a single design.
We propose a mechanism embedded into the foundational infrastructure of a blockchain network, designed to improve the utility of idle network resources, whilst enhancing market microstructure efficiency during block production by leveraging both network-owned and external capital. By systematically seeking to use idle network resources for internally capture arbitrageable inefficiencies, the mechanism mitigates extractable value leakage, reduces execution frictions, and improves price formation across venues. This framework optimises resource allocation by incentivising an ordered set of transactions to be identified and automatically executed at the end of each block, redirecting any realised arbitrage income - to marketplaces operating on the host blockchain network (and other stakeholders), which may have otherwise been extracted as rent by external actors. Crucially, this process operates without introducing additional inventory risk, ensuring that the network remains a neutral facilitator of price discovery. While the systematic framework governing the distribution of these internally captured returns is beyond the scope of this work, reinvesting them to support the ecosystem deployed on the host blockchain network is envisioned to endogenously enhance liquidity, strengthen transactional efficiency, and promote the organic adoption of the blockchain for end users. This mechanism is designed specifically for Supra's blockchain and seeks to maximally utilise its highly efficient automation framework to enhance the blockchain network's efficiency.
In the modern era of digitalization, integration with blockchain and machine learning (ML) technologies is most important for improving applications in healthcare management and secure prediction analysis of health data. This research aims to develop a novel methodology for securely storing patient medical data and analyzing it for PCOS prediction. The main goals are to leverage Hyperledger Fabric for immutable, private data and to integrate Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques to enhance transparency in decision-making. The innovation of this study is the unique integration of blockchain technology with ML and XAI, solving critical issues of data security and model interpretability in healthcare. With the Caliper tool, the Hyperledger Fabric blockchain's performance is evaluated and enhanced. The suggested Explainable AI-based blockchain system for Polycystic Ovary Syndrome detection (EAIBS-PCOS) system demonstrates outstanding performance and records 98% accuracy, 100% precision, 98.04% recall, and a resultant F1-score of 99.01%. Such quantitative measures ensure the success of the proposed methodology in delivering dependable and intelligible predictions for PCOS diagnosis, therefore making a great addition to the literature while serving as a solid solution for healthcare applications in the near future.
Open access
Impact of AI and Big Data on Business and Society
FinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Krypto-Assets sind mit der zunehmenden Beliebtheit von Kryptowährungen ein verbreitetes Anlageprodukt geworden. Das Ziel der Arbeit besteht darin, das Konzept der Blockchain mit entsprechender technischer Umsetzung zu erläutern, die Investitionseigenschaften anhand einer Analyse aufzuzeigen und die Auseinandersetzung mit häufigen Kritikpunkten. Die empirisch‑quantitative gewonnenen Daten liefern im Betrachtungszeitraum von 01.02.2018 bis 31.01.2025 folgende Erkenntnisse: Kursentwicklung: Bitcoin (1010%) weist die höchste Performance auf und übertrifft damit Ethereum (211%) um das Fünffache, den S&P 500 (114%) um das Neunfache. Tether (2%) fokussiert keine Rendite, sondern Stabilität, dient daher nur als Referenz. Volatilität: Ethereum (1.9) hat den höchsten Spitzenwert für die rollierende Volatilität im 30-Tage-Fenster, gefolgt von Bitcoin (1.5). Einem vergleichbaren Bewegungsmuster folgen der S&P 500 (0.85) und Tether (0.15) und finden ihre Extremstelle ebenso im ersten Halbjahr 2020. Die deutlich geringere Schwankungsanfälligkeit des S&P 500s ist auf die höhere Diversifizierung durch die dahinterstehenden Wertpapiere zurückzuführen, bei Tether aufgrund der direkten Wertkoppelung an US-Dollar. Rendite-Risiko-Verhältnis: Bitcoin (35%) weist in der jährlichen Betrachtungsform die höchste annualisierte Rendite auf, gefolgt von Ethereum (15%), dem S&P 500 (10%) und Tether (0.003%). Die annualisierte Standardabweichung beschreibt das Risiko und wird von Ethereum (2.11) angeführt, darauffolgend Bitcoin (1.21), der S&P 500 (0.19) und Tether (0.008). Im sich daraus ergebenden Rendite-Risiko-Verhältnis führt der S&P 500 (0.39), danach folgen Bitcoin (0.26), Ethereum (0.04) und Tether (-3.21). Somit liefert der S&P 500 trotz geringerer Performance das beste Verhältnis aus Rendite und Risiko, was auf das deutlich geringere Risiko zurückzuführen ist. Korrelation: Bitcoin und Ethereum haben die höchste Korrelation (0.81), da beide als Kryptowährungen den gleichen Marktbedingungen ausgesetzt sind. Die Differenz zu 1 ist auf Einflüsse zurückzuführen, die das Asset selbst betreffen. Der S&P 500 korreliert leicht mit Ethereum (0.3) und Bitcoin (0.28). Die geringste Korrelation weist Tether auf, im Zusammenhang mit Bitcoin (0.01), dem S&P 500 (0.01) und Ethereum (0.02). Maximum Drawdown: Ethereum (90%) hat den höchsten Verlust im Vergleich zum Höchststand. Darauf, ebenso zu Jahresende 2019, folgt Bitcoin (70%), der S&P 500 (30%) zu Beginn des Jahres 2020 und Tether (5%) Ende 2019. Gesamtbewertung: Statistisch weist Bitcoin im Vergleich zu Ethereum höhere Renditen bei geringerem Risiko auf. Die geringere Korrelation von Bitcoin mit klassischen Anlageprodukten wie dem S&P 500 kann eine Diversifikationsfunktion begründen. Haftungsausschluss: Diese Thesis dient ausschließlich akademischen Zwecken. Trotz größter Sorgfalt bei der Erstellung kann keine Gewähr für die Richtigkeit und Vollständigkeit der enthaltenen Informationen übernommen werden. Der Autor übernimmt keine Haftung für Folgen, die sich aus der Verwendung dieser Arbeit ergeben. Disclaimer: This thesis is intended for academic purposes only. Although care has been taken to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the information, no guarantee is made that it is free of errors or omissions. The author assumes no responsibility for any consequences arising from its use.
A Smart Contract (SC) is a digital negotiation process between two or more anonymized participants without trusted middlemen. It is an autonomous SC manifested as software code. SC operates on the blockchain (BC). The program and the SC are immutable and preserved on a decentralized public registry. Many potential applications for SC exist within the digital economy, encompassing financial services, administration, medical care, and the Internet of Things (IoT). Ethereum and Hyperledger constitute the most prevalent open-source advanced cross-industry BC systems for cross-border collaboration. Significant technological concerns, including security, privacy, accuracy, and verifiability, remain unresolved and require further maturation in BC. This study thoroughly examines SC. The research provides a case study on a university test system characterized by a heterogeneous data structure. This implementation provides an in-depth comprehension of the SC architecture and has been utilized to identify and evaluate the deficiencies in the current state of SC technology.
This article examines the legal qualification of smart contracts within civil law jurisdictions, emphasizing the challenges posed by automated, code-based agreements in systems traditionally grounded in codified statutes and doctrinal principles. By exploring current scholarly debates, legislative approaches, and judicial interpretations, this study highlights the tension between the self-executing nature of smart contracts and the requirement for consent, formality, and interpretation under civil codes. Drawing on a qualitative analysis of doctrinal writings, statutory frameworks, and case-based discussions, the paper identifies core issues of enforceability, liability, and consumer protection. Results reveal the need for a more coherent integration of legal theory and technological design, underscoring the role of hybrid solutions that blend human interpretation with automated execution. The discussion situates these findings in the broader trajectory of contract law modernization, concluding with recommendations for policymakers and practitioners regarding risk mitigation, technological design improvements, and harmonized regulatory standards.
This comprehensive study examines the integration of smart contracts into civil law systems and analyzes the associated regulatory challenges. The research investigates the fundamental nature of smart contracts as technological tools and legal instruments, their compatibility with existing civil law frameworks, and the emerging regulatory approaches across different jurisdictions. Through systematic analysis of legislative developments, case law, and scholarly discourse, this study identifies key legal issues including contract formation, performance, enforcement, and dispute resolution in the context of smart contracts. The findings reveal significant gaps in current regulatory frameworks and propose solutions for harmonizing smart contract implementation with established civil law principles. This research contributes to the ongoing academic discourse on legal technology integration and provides practical recommendations for legislators, legal practitioners, and technology developers.
Francisco J. Díaz, Carolina Menchaca, Lukas Weidener
Introduction The scientific community is increasingly interested in leveraging decentralized technologies to address systemic challenges such as the reputation economy, the monopolization of academic publishing, and the replication crisis. This study presents an analysis of the Decentralized Science (DeSci) landscape in 2023, focusing on organizational structures, technological foundations, and funding mechanisms of DeSci organizations. Methods A 16-question survey was distributed to DeSci organizations between December 2023 and April 2024, and responses from 49 projects were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative methods. Results Results highlight the prominent role of Ethereum as the dominant blockchain platform in DeSci, the varied applications of blockchain in scientific processes, and a significant emphasis on community building and infrastructure development. Funding sources within the ecosystem are moving towards partnerships with more traditional organizations, including academia. However, most projects lack DAO features for governance. It remains uncertain whether they will adopt more DAO-like structures in the future or deploy a different organizational model. Discussion Our findings offer a comprehensive overview of the progress and challenges facing the DeSci ecosystem, including slow project progression due to leadership issues and limited funding for most DeSci projects. By identifying key patterns and areas for improvement, this study contributes to a deeper understanding of the factors driving success and sustainability in DeSci.
Silvia Landa, Elisha Y. Sanoussi, Ezechiel Mahamane, Kairou Oudou Bilo Mahamadou · 6 authors
Water, sanitation, hygiene, waste management, and other environmental health services are critical for safe health systems, but global access is lacking. Adequate financing is a key barrier, and understanding resource allocation can help identify solutions in resource-limited contexts. We conducted a qualitative case examining resource allocation in rural Niger. Our objectives were to understand resource allocation processes, key actors and their roles, and contextual factors that influenced resource allocation. We interviewed thirty-three healthcare workers, community leaders, and government officials. We found that resource allocation followed formal and informal processes. Formal processes encompassed annual budgets and monthly supplies through government channels, while informal processes depended on healthcare workers' out-of-pocket expenses, unpaid labor, in-kind community support, healthcare facility revenue, and contributions from non-governmental and United Nations agencies, and the diaspora. Informal resource allocation was critical to fill the gap when formal processes were slow or insufficient. Resource allocation was highly decentralized with minimal influence of national policies and legal frameworks at the local level. Key contextual factors influencing resource allocation included politicization of budgets at the commune level, sometimes leading to inefficiency or inequity. We observed that healthcare facility actors who were most knowledgeable of needs often held the least decision-making power. We concluded that informal processes were complementary to formal processes, not conflicting. In contexts where government funding is severely limited, informal mechanisms may be the only viable short-term option to ensure the availability of services, demonstrating greater flexibility and adaptability. However, ultimately informal processes are an interim solution that should be explored to ensure service delivery without undermining long-term government systems strengthening. We recommend that funders commit to long-term initiatives promoting local government democratic decision-making, account for local actors' capacities and incentives, and acknowledge dynamic formal and informal resource allocations to optimize investments and trade-offs.
Cryptocurrencies do not have proper economic fundamentals. Consequently, economic variables cannot predict crypto prices. According to economic theory, cryptocurrencies are unbacked assets that are inherently unforecastable. However, a growing strand of literature suggests global crypto markets to be informationally inefficient. It implies the possibility of return predictability based on past information. Forecasting the allegedly unforecastable becomes feasible. Keeping it sophisticatedly simple, past infomation can be captured by autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) processes of principal components. However, Principal Component Analysis (PCA) for crypto price series is due to their non-Gaussian property not applicable and requires the assumption of a stochastic trend model. Making use of the Central Limit Theorem, Independent Component Analysis (ICA) overcomes this deficiency. We show that ICA combined with ARIMA modeling more than triples the predictability of global crypto price dynamics. • Crypto markets are found to be inefficient in the sense of majority games. • ICA based ARIMA more than triples predictability of crypto price dynamics. • ICA based ARIMA is most reliable for directional out-of-sample predictions.
Hafiz Farooq Ahmad, Fatimah Mohammad Alhassan, Asrar U. Haque, Sarah Shafqat
Personal Health Records (PHRs) would empower patients play active role for quality healthcare provision and access for routine checkup and self-care management. There is a need to recognize security, privacy and interoperability issues for successful design, implementation and adoption of PHR at a wider scale. However, it is one of the greatest challenges to achieve interoperability, security and privacy simultaneously in healthcare domain. Health Level Seven (HL7) international standards body is working to propose interoperability standards for healthcare information systems. However, privacy and security need to be incorporated in the system design and implementation. This work focuses on designing HL7 compliant PHR with security and privacy using blockchain, which is a distributed ledger data storage mechanism. The scope of the paper is limited to a number of core functional requirements of Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR). The PHR models applications of blockchain to these requirements to propose base system architecture. Several tools support FHIR compliant development of HL7 family of standards. We analyzed existing blockchain based PHR and their data sharing services in the domain to integrate FHIR and blockchain technologies. The goal is to share patient's data to facilitate health services by designing for a trusted interoperable sharing of data among different custodians such as physicians and insurance companies. Simultaneously the proof of concept is created through prototype implementation using Python in the open source tool Spyder IDE.
This publication presents a novel cryptographic commit scheme named DFTWS which is used to enable deterministic, fair, and transparent winner selection in an open source Proof-of-Useful-Work blockchain for High Energy Physics (HEP) called gophy. In gophy, instead of spamming hashing operations to mine blocks, miners are running computationally expensive Monte Carlo simulations to support a real-world HEP experiment with necessary data required to conduct the experiment. To preserve the usefulness property, block problems are defined over time by a Root Authority which is coordinated by a representative of a real-world HEP experiment. In order to be able to provide a transparent mechanism that allows for fair block winner selection from a list of eligible miners that solved a block problem, DFTWS is employed to achieve consensus between nodes. A strength of this approach is that every node is able to verify the fairness of the winner selection process. This publication provides an in-depth description and theoretical fairness analysis of DFTWS, a practical evaluation of its performance under real-world conditions and considerations of potential bottlenecks that can potentially occur as the node network scales. It also discusses a deployment strategy for using DFTWS on top of existing blockchain infrastructure like the Ethereum network. Additionally, theoretical performance aspects of DFTWS are compared with various state-of-the-art cryptographic commitment schemes and Zero-Knowledge Proof systems.