Report generated by Version 2024-08-02-base

Document Title: Table of Contents Author: Naveen Antony Ananth

We are not confident this text is human generated

Classification Probability Breakdown Plagiarism Scan

human ?
human mixed ai
75% 4% 21%

21% probability AI generated Plagiarism scan not activated

not confident

AI Scanned Document
AI Content

Table of Contents
Table of Contents

Part 1: Blockchain3

1.1 What is Blockchain3

1.2 Security Vulnerabilities and Risks Associated with Blockchain Adoption3

1.3 Blockchain Consensus Protocols and Their Role4

1.4 Limitation of Blockchain Consensus Protocols4

1.5 Blockchain Innovations and Future Directions5

Part 2: Blockchain Applications in the Internet of Things (IoT)6

2.1 What is the Internet of Things (IoT)?6

2.2.1 Major Components of IoT6

2.2.2 Characteristics of IoT: The 4 A's and 4 C's7

2.2 Comparison of IoT Network Topology and Blockchain-Enabled IoT Networks7

2.3 Capabilities of Blockchain Technology in the IoT Ecosystem8

2.4 Research-Based Solutions for Blockchain and IoT in Healthcare9

Conclusion11

References13

Part 1: Blockchain
1.1 What is Blockchain

Blockchain is a distributed ledger technology (DLT). It enables parties to uphold an unchangeable log of transac-
tions without depending on a central entity. Initially created to back Bitcoin up when it started, but has expanded
to play roles outside the realm of cryptocurrency, in sectors, like healthcare, finance, supply chain management,
and the Internet of Things (IoTs). (Ahram et al., 2017). Blockchain's key breakthrough lies in its capability to estab-
lish trust within a decentralized network and facilitate peer-to-peer transactions.

In the world of blockchain technology, a blockchain is created by connecting blocks of data. Each block contains a
record of transactions, a time stamp, and a coded hash of the previous block. This design guarantees that if anyone
tries to change just one block all the following blocks would lose their validity, thus safeguarding the integrity of
the entire chain (as proposed by Nakamoto in 2008). When a new transaction is made it is shared with a network
of nodes that confirm the transaction through an agreement process (which will be discussed later). After con-
firming its authenticity the transaction gets included in a block. Then connected to the preceding block creating
an unbroken and secure record (Moghariya & Shambarkar 2023).

In the Bitcoin network, as an example, when it comes to mining activities on the platform miners engage in solv-
ing complex mathematical puzzles to authenticate transactions, whereby the initial miner to solve such a puzzle
successfully incorporates the block into the blockchain and earns bitcoins as a reward, this practice recognized as
Proof of Work (PoW), stands out as one among various consensus mechanisms that find application, in blockchain
technology (Antonopoulos 2017).

1.2 Security Vulnerabilities and Risks Associated with Blockchain Adoption

While the security measures of technology are strong overall it is important to acknowledge that there are still
risks and vulnerabilities involved. Many significant obstacles need to be taken into account when implementing
blockchain across different sectors;

51% Attack: In systems such, as Bitcoin that rely on Proof of Work (PoW) a situation called a 51 percent attack
occurs when one entity or a group gains control over more than 50% of the network's computing power. They
could potentially alter the blockchain by changing transaction records or blocking new transactions from being
included. This type of attack is considered risky, especially in networks, with limited participation (Bonneau et al.,
2015)

Double-Spending: Double spending refers to the act of spending the currency more than once by a dishonest in-
dividual or entity. While blockchain technology is meant to prevent spending through its consensus mechanisms
some vulnerabilities could be exploited in certain scenarios, especially within smaller or less secure networks as
highlighted by Narayanan et al., 2016.

Smart Contract Vulnerabilities: Smart contracts are contracts that can execute themselves based on written code
containing the agreement terms directly. However beneficial, for streamlining processes and fostering trust in
transactions, without intermediaries smart contracts can be susceptible to coding mistakes and weaknesses. The
DAO hack on the Ethereum platform, in 2016 serves as a known instance of vulnerabilities being exploited by
hackers to steal $50 million worth of Ether.

Privacy Concerns: Blockchain's transparency is a double-edged sword. While it boosts trust and accountability. It
also raises privacy concerns. Transactions are openly viewable, to all parties in public blockchains. Despite users
being pseudonymous, advanced tracing methods can connect transactions to individuals posing a threat, under-
mining privacy (Conti et al., 2018). Certain blockchain technologies, like Zcash and Monero, strive to tackle this
problem through the use of encryption methods to hide transaction specifics (Moghariya & Shambarkar 2023).

Scalability Issues: Scalability problems are a huge concern for networks when there is a surge in the number of
users and transactions being processed. The decentralized nature of the system requires every node to handle
all transactions which can slow down processing times and increase fees during high usage periods (Zheng et al.,
2017). This becomes a challenge for applications such as IoT where billions of devices are projected to produce an
amount of transactions (Moghariya & Shambharkar 2023).

1.3 Blockchain Consensus Protocols and Their Role

Consensus mechanisms play a fundamental role in maintaining the security and trustworthiness of technology by
enabling all members of a decentralized network to reach an agreement regarding the ledger's status without
relying solely upon a central governing body. Various consensus protocols are employed across blockchain plat-
forms to offer benefits and face specific challenges;

Proof of Work (PoW): In the Bitcoins system, Proof of Work (PoW) miners must solve complex math problems to
verify transactions and generate blocks securely by doing the work. It is highly secure because if someone wishes
to alter the blockchain in the future it would be a daunting task that's practically unfeasible due to its heavy energy
consumption making it environmentally unsustainable in the long term (De Vries 2018).

Proof of Stake (PoS): In contrast to Proof of Work, where miners rely on their computational power. PoS selects
validators based on the number of tokens they keep, who are incentivized to act forthrightly. While Proof of Stake
requires less energy than Proof of Work it does pose risks such as centralization, where those, with token holdings
hold greater sway over the network (King & Nadal 2012).

Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance (PBFT): PBFT is often applied in permissioned blockchains where users are
familiar and trustworthy. The protocol requires a consensus, among a majority of nodes to verify a transaction
before it is recorded in the blockchain. PBFT is known for its speed and energy efficiency, however, it may face
challenges when applied to decentralized networks like Bitcoin(Castro & Liskov 1999).

Proof of Authority (PoA); In the realm of technology Proof of Authority (PoA) functions as a consensus mecha-
nism that designates a group of trusted validators with the responsibility to validate blocks within the networks
operations typically found in private or consortium blockchains that emphasize security and efficiency over de-
centralization (De Angelis et al. 2018).

1.4 Limitations of Blockchain Consensus Protocols

Although blockchain consensus mechanisms offer security measures they do come with limitations as well. The
issue of scalability is one of the major concerns, especially in networks that are based on Proof of Work (PoW). The
need for resources to verify transactions and create new blocks rises significantly with the expansion of the net-
work. This leads to delays in transaction processing time and an increase in costs making blockchain less suitable,
for applications that demand processing and low delays such as the Internet of Things (IoT) or real-time financial
services(Zheng et al., 2017).

For instance, Bitcoin can manage 7 transactions, per second, while Visa processes thousands of transactions every
second. Because of this constraint PoW-based blockchains are not ideal for situations that require transactions (De
Vries 2018). To tackle these scalability challenges developers are investigating solutions like off-chain methods,
such as the Lightning Network, and sharding (Moghariya & Shambharkar 2023).

1.5 Blockchain Innovations and Future Directions

Blockchain technology is advancing continually with ideas to overcome its existing challenges. One of these
ideas involves creating lightweight blockchains specifically for the Internet of Things (IoTs). These specialized
blockchains are meant to lessen the computing and storage requirements to suit IoT devices, with limited re-
sources. Approaches like Proof of Understanding (PoU) and Lightweight Consensus for IoT (LC4IoT) have been
suggested to improve scalability and effectiveness, in blockchain IoT systems (Moghariya & Shambharkar 2023).

Another potential area, for exploration involves merging Artificial Intelligence (AI) with technology to enhance
the independent decision-making processes within decentralized networks. As AI and blockchain are merged to-
gether it opens up opportunities to establish self-regulating IoT systems where devices can securely interact and
carry out transactions without the need for human involvement (Ahram et al., 2017).

In addition to that point; New cryptographic algorithms that are quantum-resistant are being created to protect
networks from risks posed by quantum computing in the future. These quantum computers have the capability
to crack the existing systems used in securing blockchains; hence developing quantum technologies is crucial, for
the future safeguarding of these systems (Narayanan et al., 2016).

Part 2: Blockchain Applications in the Internet of Things (IoT)

2.1 What is the Internet of Things (IoT)?

The Internet of Things (IoT) concept involves a network of objects or "things" equipped with sensors and software
to gather and share data online seamlessly and efficiently over the Internet. The goal of IoT is to achieve autonomy
without human involvement, in various sectors, like healthcare, smart homes, manufacturing, and transportation.

Essentially speaking, the Internet of Things (IoT) broadens the reach of the Internet beyond computing gadgets
such as phones and laptops to encompass a range of interconnected objects. These objects span from household
items to industrial equipment. For instance;

Wearables: Fitness trackers, like Fitbit, are examples of wearables that keep track of health data such, as heart rate
and sleep quality.
Smart home devices such, as thermostats and refrigerators can be managed from a distance along, with lighting
systems.

Connected Cars: Cars that are connected gather information, about how the vehicle is performing and offer en-
hanced functionalities such, as navigation and remote diagnostics.

Healthcare devices, like smart insulin pumps or heart monitors send information to doctors instantly to improve
treatment results (Muofhe et al., 2019).

The concept behind IoT revolves around enabling machines to communicate with each other (known as mach-
ine-to-machine or M2M communication) which facilitates the collection of real-time data for analysis and quick
responses. By 2020, the prediction was that more than 20 billion devices would be interconnected through IoTs a
number that keeps increasing with the rise of homes and cities and industrial IoT setups (Gupta & Gupta, in 2016).

2.2.1 Major Components of the Internet of Things

In the realm of IoT, some elements collaborate to offer smooth connectivity and operations as illustrated in the
diagram below (Figure 1). As noted by Gupta & Gupta (2016) these elements encompass;

Sensors: IoT devices rely on sensors to gather information from their surroundings. For instance, in wearables
tracking heart rates or temperatures and in homes detecting motion or humidity levels.

Network Communication: Data transmission in network communication involves transferring collected informa-
tion to devices or central servers in systems through diverse communication technologies like Wi-Fi, Bluetooth,
and 4G/5G networks, alongside Near Field Communication (NFC). (Muofhe et al., 2019).

Cloud storage and data processing play a role in handling the volume of information produced by IoT devices
through cloud environments. The use of cloud computing is essential, for processing the data gathered from de-
vices and converting it into insights that can be acted upon (Gupta & Gupta 2016).

Applications: Apps use processed data to help smartphones and tablets interact with people and assist in making
decisions or handling tasks automatically.

The elements form a framework that allows IoT to operate smoothly and offer users access, to information and
management of their linked devices.

Figure 1 Major Components of IoT

2.2.2 Characteristics of IoT: The 4 A's and 4 C's

IoT works on the principles of the 4 A's and the 4 C's as shown in Figure 2 below, which are critical for its function-
ality and effectiveness:

The 4 A's are Anywhere, Anytime, Any Network, and Any Device, representing the ubiquity and flexibility of IoT
systems in connecting devices regardless of location or network.

The 4 C's are Convergence, Connectivity, Computing Power, and Collective Information, which highlight IoT's abil-
ity to converge different technologies, provide robust connectivity, leverage powerful computing resources, and
analyze vast amounts of data for collective insight (Gupta & Gupta, 2016).

Figure 2 Characteristics of IoT: The 4 A's and 4 C's

This structure enables IoT to collect, transmit, and process information efficiently, making it possible for devices
to perform complex tasks autonomously.

1.4 IoT Definition

In order to grasp the concept of the Internet of Things (IoT) effectively several standard organizations and devel-
opment bodies have offered their interpretations. Table 1.1 highlights a range of definitions put forth by standard
organizations.

Standard organization

IoT definition

Institute of Electronic and Electric Engineering (IEEE)

“The Internet of Things (IoT) is a framework in which all things have a representation and a presence in the Internet.
More specifically, the IoT aims at offering new applications and services bridging the physical and virtual worlds,
in which Machine-to-Machine (M2M) communications represents the baseline communication that enables the
interactions between Things and applications in the Cloud.”

Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS)

“System where the Internet is connected to the physical world via ubiquitous sensors.”

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

“Cyber Physical systems (CPS) - sometimes referred to as the Internet of Things (IoT) - involves connecting smart
devices and systems in diverse sectors like transportation, energy, manufacturing, and healthcare in fundamental-
ly new ways. Smart Cities/Communities are increasingly adopting CPS/IoT technologies to enhance the efficiency
and sustainability of their operation and improve the quality of life.”

International Standard Organization (ISO)

It is an infrastructure of interconnected objects, people, systems, and information resources together with intel-
ligent services to allow them to process information of the physical and the virtual world and react.”

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)

“In the vision of IoT, “things” are very various such as computers, sensors, people, actuators, refrigerators, TVs,
vehicles, mobile phones, clothes, food, medicines, books, etc. These things are classified as three scopes: people,
machines (for example, sensor, actuator, etc.) and information (for example, clothes, food, medicine, books, etc.).
These 'things' should be identified at least by one unique way of identification for the capability of addressing
and communicating with each other and verifying their identities. In here, if the 'thing' is identified, we call it the
'object'.”

International Telecommunication Unit (ITU)

“IoT is type of network that is available anywhere, anytime, by anything and anyone.”

2.2 Comparison of IoT Network Topology and Blockchain-Enabled IoT Networks

The traditional IoT network topology typically follows a centralized architecture. In this setup, the IoT devices in-
teract with centralized servers or cloud-based systems based in the cloud. These servers. Analyze the information
gathered by the devices, enabling authorized users to manage and monitor them. Nonetheless, centralized net-
works are at risk of security breaches, data manipulation, and breakdowns at a single point. Also as the quantity
of IoT devices increases centralized structures face challenges in scaling up efficiently (Sicari et al., 2015 ).

By comparison, blockchain-enabled IoT networks employ a decentralized topology where IoT devices interact
with each other through a distributed ledger (Moghariya & Shambharkar 2023). The blockchain eliminates the
requirement for centralized servers by utilizing a network of dispersed nodes. Each node retains a version of the
blockchain, engages in the agreement process to authenticate transactions or data transfers. This method en-
hances security and transparency as no single entity holds authority, over the information.

Comparison Table: IoT vs. Blockchain-Enabled IoT Networks

Aspect

Traditional IoT Network (Centralized)

Blockchain-Enabled IoT (Decentralized)

Control

Centralized server or cloud-based

Decentralized, peer-to-peer network

Security

Vulnerable to single points of failure

Improved security with distributed nodes

Scalability

Limited by central server capacity

More scalable with distributed validation

Trust

Requires trusted third parties

Trustless system with consensus

Data Integrity

Can be tampered with if server compromised

Immutable and tamper-proof data

Diagram 1: Traditional IoT Network

Diagram 2: Blockchain-Enabled IoT Network

In a blockchain-enabled IoT network, devices can communicate with each other without the need for middlemen
which helps prevent data tampering and strengthens trust and privacy between devices and users. Decentralized
IoT systems also address the issue of single point of failure making them better protected against attacks and
disruptions (as discussed by Dorri et al., 2017).

2.3 Capabilities of Blockchain Technology in the IoT Ecosystem

Blockchain technology offers advantages that can greatly benefit the ecosystem by enhancing trustworthiness,
decentralization, scalability, and autonomy to enhance IoT applications.

Trustworthiness:

Ensuring the accuracy and reliability of data from networks is crucial for IoT operations to be effective and trust-
worthy in technology because it maintains a secure and unchangeable record of information with network agree-
ments. For instance in managing supply chains; Sensors used in IoT constantly analyze product conditions such
as temperature and humidity while relaying this information onto a platform, for storage and accessibility. This
immutable record can be viewed by individuals involved in the process (like manufacturers, retailers, and even
customers) to check the integrity of the item as it moves through the supply chain without being altered or mis-
represented (Kouzizade and Sarkis in 2018).

Decentralization

Traditional IoT networks relying on centralized servers can have vulnerabilities and scalability challenges com-
pared to blockchain-based networks that enable direct communication between devices. When considering
smart energy grids as an example, IoT-equipped smart meters oversee and track energy generation and usage.
Blockchain technology enables peer-to-peer energy transactions allowing consumers to save more energy. Fur-
thermore, this allows someone with energy to sell it directly to others on the network without involving a utility
company as an intermediary (Mengelkamp et al., 2018). The decentralized method enhances the efficiency and
security of energy distribution.

Scalability

The increasing number of IoT devices poses a problem for traditional systems that face difficulties in managing
the vast amount of data produced by billions of devices. Blockchain has shown its capability to expand networks
through off-chain solutions like sharding and state channels that operate outside the chain. An instance is IOTA's
Tangle system (a blockchain-based distributed ledger) tailored to facilitate applications by allowing secure and
economical microtransactions, among IoT devices. The Tangle removes the necessity for miners and enables the
network to expand effectively as additional devices come on board (Popov, 2016).

Autonomy:

IoT devices frequently operate without dependency by utilizing real-time data to make decisions autonomously.
The utilization of blockchain's smart contracts enables devices to carry out actions once specific conditions are
satisfied. Smart healthcare IoT devices like insulin pumps can independently regulate doses by analyzing blood
sugar levels received from sensors. Blockchains smart contracts provide security and guarantee automatic exe-
cution of these actions without requiring intervention (Underwood 2016).

2.4 Research-Based Solutions for Blockchain and IoT in Healthcare

When blockchain technology is combined with the Internet of Things (IoT) it can revolutionize the healthcare sec-
tor by tackling issues, like safeguarding data privacy and ensuring interoperability among systems in the industry.
Numerous research-backed ideas aim to enhance healthcare offerings by concentrating on tasks such as manag-
ing records and tracking medication origins while enabling real-time tracking using IoT devices. Here we delve into
applications of blockchain and IoT, in healthcare to shed light on what they can accomplish and where they may
fall short.

Blockchain-IoT in Patient Data Management

Managing patient data securely is a critical issue in healthcare environments as databases are prone to cyberat-
tacks. Breaches of data security can hinder the sharing of patient information efficiently among different health-
care providers and cause delays in providing diagnosis and treatment.

Blockchain technology combined with IoT devices provides a transparent solution, to various issues by ensuring
security and efficiency in managing patient data gathered from wearable devices like health monitors that track
vital signs such, as heart rate and blood pressure as outlined in a research study conducted by Muofhe et al in
2019. The blockchain technology guarantees that the information stays safe and immutable while also being easily
available to healthcare professionals, with the permissions Muofhe et al., 2019).

Capabilities: This system boosts the protection and confidentiality of information by utilizing technology's decen-
tralized ledger system that permits only authorized individuals to view or alter the data securely in place. Addi-
tionally, the incorporation of Internet of Things (IoT) devices enables real-time tracking of patients' conditions
empowering healthcare professionals to make well-informed judgments.

Limitations: The Blockchain IoT system provides security and instant access to data. It encounters scalability issues
as the IoT device count rises due to the blockchain network, potentially having difficulty handling the large data
volumes generated by such devices over time. This could pose challenges in rectifying errors or updating details
despite the advantage it brings in maintaining data integrity (Muofhe et al., 2019).

Drug Traceability and Supply Chain Management

Fake medications pose a significant problem in the pharma sector, especially in developing nations where around
25 percent of drugs could be fake or below standard quality levels. To tackle this issue effectively and enhance
the tracking of drugs across the supply chain pathways, blockchain and IoT technologies are being considered as
solutions.

Nawale and Konapure's (2021) research introduced a system that combines Blockchain and IoT technology to
track drugs in the pharmaceutical supply chain effectively. It involves using devices, like RFID tags and sensors to
oversee the whereabouts of drug shipments and ensure they are kept under environmental conditions such as
temperature and humidity, in real-time. The information gathered by the Internet of Things (IoT) devices is stored
in a system. This creates a transparent log of how medications move through the supply chain from the maker to
the person using them (source; Nawale & Konapure, 2021).

Capabilities: Combining IoT with blockchain in the supply chain process, for medications like manufacturers and
pharmacists ensures legitimacy and safety, for consumers by verifying drug authenticity at each step while pre-
venting products from reaching patients. The unchangeable nature of technology secures the integrity and relia-
bility of supply chain data by recording drug information that cannot be tampered with once added to the ledger
system.

Limitations: One key drawback of this system is the data reliability concern it faces despite blockchain ensuring
data permanence but not accuracy assurance for entered data. If inaccurate information is submitted by any party
in the supply chain, the blockchain will retain that incorrect data permanently. Additionally incorporating devices
adds complexity to the system necessitating infrastructure and financial resources (Nawale & Konapure 2021).

Remote Patient Monitoring and Chronic Disease Management

The surge in illnesses like diabetes and heart disease has led to a need for remote patient monitoring systems that
employ IoT gadgets to consistently track patients' health data and send it to medical professionals for immediate
assessment.
Pradhan et al. (2021) designed a blockchain-based smart healthcare system to monitor patients with chronic ill-
nesses effectively. The system utilizes devices that constantly gather health information, like glucose levels and
heart rate. The collected data is sent to a platform where smart contracts are implemented to send alerts if a
patient's health indicators deviate from established limits (Pradhan et al., 2021).

Capabilities: This system improves the independence and effectiveness of healthcare services by enabling auto-
mated health monitoring processes to take place seamlessly. Smart contracts promptly alert healthcare providers
about any conditions that demand attention to minimize manual interventions needed. Moreover, relying on
blockchain technology guarantees that all health-related data remains securely saved and accessible solely to au-
thorized individuals.

Limitations: Challenges exist with the system due to issues like data privacy and scalability despite its benefits. The
significant data volume from devices can strain networks causing delays in data processing and storage. While
blockchain offers data security assurance concerns remain regarding confidentiality, in public blockchain systems
where all participants can view the data (Pradhan et al., 2021).

Chosen Approach: Blockchain-IoT for Chronic Disease Monitoring

Out of all the solutions, the use of blockchain-IoT systems for chronic disease monitoring stands out as a par-
ticularly promising application; the utilization of blockchain IOT systems is notable for its potential benefits and
efficiency, in addressing this important issue with the help of IoT-connected devices and the decentralized ledger
provided by blockchain technology.

The use of technology guarantees the transfer and safeguarding of health information. Smart contracts stream-
line the notification process for healthcare professionals when action is needed promptly. For instance, in man-
aging diabetes Internet of Things (IoT) devices can keep track of a patient's blood sugar levels continuously. Ini-
tiate an automatic alert if those levels drop critically low. This setup not only enhances results but also eases the
workload, on healthcare workers by automating mundane duties (Pradhan et al., 2021; Sahoo et al., 2023).

Furthermore, this method tackles some of the drawbacks of healthcare systems, like data fragmentation and the
lack of interoperability. When IoT is combined with blockchain, hospital staff can view an up-to-date overview of
a patient's health information no matter its source. This enhances the standard of care. Decreases the chances of
mistakes due, to missing or outdated data(Sahoo et al.,2023).

Supporting Evidence: Recent research has demonstrated that combining blockchain with the Internet of Things
(IoT) in the monitoring of illnesses can lead to a notable decrease in hospital readmission rates and enhance the
well-being of patients in meaningful ways. The work by Sahoo et al. (2023), for example, revealed how blockchain
IoT setups have the potential to offer timely health surveillance for individuals with conditions resulting in less-
ening the necessity for frequent visits, to healthcare facilities(Sahoo et al., 2023).

Conclusion

The combination of blockchain technology and the IoT offers a solution to various obstacles encountered by both
of these sectors.

In Part 1, the discussion was about the principles of blockchain technology and its importance in safeguarding
decentralized systems. Despite the benefits that blockchain technology offers. Some obstacles need to be over-
come for acceptance. Such as scalability issues, high energy consumption, and Security risks like 51 percent at-
tacks. Introducing innovations such as consensus protocols and advanced cryptographic techniques is essential for
maximizing blockchain capabilities in settings with limited resources such as the Internet of Things environment.

In Part 2, the discussion is focused on blockchain's role in IoT (Internet of Things), with the emphasis turned to-
wards its practical uses and benefits in enhancing IoT networks through improved trustworthiness, and security
features, alongside scalability enhancements. Blockchain technology offers a means to securely validate and store
data while minimizing risks of alterations and empowering autonomy through smart contract implementation.
The example presented in healthcare showcases how combining blockchain with IoT can enhance the manage-
ment of data systems as well as monitor chronic diseases and track drug supply chains effectively.

While there are obstacles to overcome in terms of scalability and protecting data privacy for the merging of IoT
and blockchain; this fusion presents a foundation, for driving innovation in various sectors including healthcare and
supply chain management as well as in the development of smart cities. As these technologies progress together
over time; their combination offers the potential to tackle inefficiencies effectively by creating systems that are
more secure and efficient while paving the way for operations, in the years ahead.

References
Antonopoulos, A. M. (2017). Mastering Bitcoin: Unlocking Digital Cryptocurrencies. O'Reilly Media.

Atzei, N., Bartoletti, M., & Cimoli, T. (2017). A survey of attacks on Ethereum smart contracts (SoK). Proceedings of
the 6th International Conference on Principles of Security and Trust, 164-186. Springer.

Bonneau, J., Miller, A., Clark, J., Narayanan, A., Kroll, J. A., & Felten, E. W. (2015). Sok: Research perspectives and
challenges for Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 104-121.

Castro, M., & Liskov, B. (1999). Practical Byzantine fault tolerance. In OSDI (Vol. 99, pp. 173-186).

Conti, M., Kumar, E. S., Lal, C., & Ruj, S. (2018). A survey on security and privacy issues of Bitcoin. IEEE Communica-
tions Surveys & Tutorials, 20(4), 3416-3452.

De Vries, A. (2018). Bitcoin's growing energy problem. Joule, 2(5), 801-805.

King, S., & Nadal, S. (2012). PPCoin: Peer-to-peer crypto-currency with proof-of-stake. Self-Published Paper, August
19.

Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Bitcoin.org.

Narayanan, A., Bonneau, J., Felten, E., Miller, A., & Goldfeder, S. (2016). Bitcoin and cryptocurrency technologies.
Princeton University Press.

Muofhe, M., Dlodlo, N., & Terzoli, A. (2019). An Internet of Things-Based System Integrated with Blockchain to
Manage Patient Data in the Healthcare Sector. IEEE TEMSCON.

Nawale, S. D., & Konapure, R. R. (2021). Blockchain & IoT-based Drugs Traceability for Pharma Industry. 2021 IEEE
International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE/ITMC).

Pradhan, N. R., Rout, S. S., & Singh, A. P. (2021). Blockchain Based Smart Healthcare System for Chronic Illness Pa-
tient Monitoring. IEEE Conference on Energy, Power, and Environment.

Sahoo, A., Lenka, R. K., Mallick, S. R., & Tripathy, P. K. (2023). Blockchain Applications in IoT-based Healthcare Sys-
tem: A Review. IEEE OCIT Conference.

Moghariya, J., & Shambharkar, P. G. (2023). Blockchain-Enabled IoT (B-IoT): Overview, Security, Scalability & Chal-
lenges. IEEE Transactions on Electrical, Electronics, and Computer Engineering, 209-216.

Zheng, Z., Xie, S., Dai, H., Chen, X., & Wang, H. (2017). An overview of blockchain technology: Architecture, consen-
sus, and future trends. In 2017 IEEE international congress on big data (pp. 557-564). IEEE.

Kouhizadeh, M., & Sarkis, J. (2018). Blockchain practices, potentials, and perspectives in greening supply chains.
Sustainability, 10(10), 3652.

Dorri, A., Kanhere, S. S., Jurdak, R., & Gauravaram, P. (2017). Blockchain for IoT security and privacy: The case study
of a smart home. 2017 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops
(PerCom Workshops), 618-623.

Popov, S. (2016). The Tangle. IOTA Foundation.

Underwood, S. (2016). Blockchain beyond bitcoin. Communications of the ACM, 59(11), 15-17.

Gubbi, J., Buyya, R., Marusic, S., & Palaniswami, M. (2013). Internet of Things (IoT): A vision, architectural elements,
and future directions. Future Generation Computer Systems, 29(7), 1645-1660.

Mengelkamp, E., Gärttner, J., & Rock, D. (2018). A blockchain-based smart grid: Towards sustainable energy ex-
change networks. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 123, 96-106.

Gupta, R., & Gupta, R. (2016). ABC of Internet of Things: Advancements, Benefits, Challenges, Enablers, and Facil-
ities of IoT. 2016 Symposium on Colossal Data Analysis and Networking (CDAN).

Muofhe, M., Dlodlo, N., & Terzoli, A. (2019). An Internet of Things-Based System Integrated with Blockchain to
Manage Patient Data in the Healthcare Sector. IEEE TEMSCON.
FAQ
What is GPTZero?
GPTZero is the leading AI detector for checking whether a document was written by a large language model such as
ChatGPT. GPTZero detects AI on sentence, paragraph, and document level. Our model was trained on a large, diverse
corpus of human-written and AI-generated text, with a focus on English prose. To date, GPTZero has served over 2.5 million
users around the world, and works with over 100 organizations in education, hiring, publishing, legal, and more.

When should I use GPTZero?

Our users have seen the use of AI-generated text proliferate into education, certification, hiring and recruitment, social
writing platforms, disinformation, and beyond. We've created GPTZero as a tool to highlight the possible use of AI in
writing text. In particular, we focus on classifying AI use in prose. Overall, our classifier is intended to be used to flag
situations in which a conversation can be started (for example, between educators and students) to drive further inquiry
and spread awareness of the risks of using AI in written work.

Does GPTZero only detect ChatGPT outputs?

No, GPTZero works robustly across a range of AI language models, including but not limited to ChatGPT, GPT-4, GPT-3,
GPT-2, LLaMA, and AI services based on those models.

What are the limitations of the classifier?

The nature of AI-generated content is changing constantly. As such, these results should not be used to punish students.
We recommend educators to use our behind-the-scene Writing Reports as part of a holistic assessment of student work.
There always exist edge cases with both instances where AI is classified as human, and human is classified as AI. Instead,
we recommend educators take approaches that give students the opportunity to demonstrate their understanding in
a controlled environment and craft assignments that cannot be solved with AI. Our classifier is not trained to identify
AI-generated text after it has been heavily modified after generation (although we estimate this is a minority of the uses for
AI-generation at the moment). Currently, our classifier can sometimes flag other machine-generated or highly procedural
text as AI-generated, and as such, should be used on more descriptive portions of text.

I'm an educator who has found AI-generated text by my students. What do I do?
Firstly, at GPTZero, we don't believe that any AI detector is perfect. There always exist edge cases with both instances
where AI is classified as human, and human is classified as AI. Nonetheless, we recommend that educators can do the
following when they get a positive detection:

Ask students to demonstrate their understanding in a controlled environment, whether that is through an in-person
assessment, or through an editor that can track their edit history (for instance, using our Writing Reports through Google
Docs). Check out our list of several recommendations on types of assignments that are difficult to solve with AI.
Ask the student if they can produce artifacts of their writing process, whether it is drafts, revision histories, or
brainstorming notes. For example, if the editor they used to write the text has an edit history (such as Google Docs), and
it was typed out with several edits over a reasonable period of time, it is likely the student work is authentic. You can use
GPTZero's Writing Reports to replay the student's writing process, and view signals that indicate the authenticity of the
work.
See if there is a history of AI-generated text in the student's work. We recommend looking for a long-term pattern of
AI use, as opposed to a single instance, in order to determine whether the student is using AI.