4.8 Article

A Blockchain-Enabled Trustless Crowd-Intelligence Ecosystem on Mobile Edge Computing

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS
Volume 15, Issue 6, Pages 3538-3547

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TII.2019.2896965

Keywords

Blockchain smart contract; crowd-intelligence ecosystem; hybrid human-machine; mobile edge computing; reward and penalty; strong Nash equilibrium; trustless

Funding

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2018YFB1004801]
  2. National Science Foundation of China [61571066, TII-18-2261]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Crowd intelligence tries to gather, process, infer, and ascertain massive useful information by utilizing the intelligence of crowds or distributed computers, which has great potential in Industrial Internet of Things. A crowd-intelligence ecosystem involves three stakeholders, namely the platform, workers (e.g., individuals, sensors, or processors), and task publisher. The stakeholders have no mutual trust but interest conflict, which means bad cooperation of them. Due to lack of trust, transferring raw data (e.g., pictures or video clips) between publisher and workers requires the remote platform center to serve as a relay node, which implies network congestion. First, we use a reward-penalty model to align the incentives of stakeholders. Then the predefined rules are implemented using blockchain smart contract on many edge servers (ES) of the mobile edge computing network, which together function as a trustless hybrid human-machine crowd-intelligence platform. As ES are near to workers and publisher, network congestion can be effectively improved. Further, we proved the existence of the only one strong Nash equilibrium, which can maximize the interests of involved ES and make the ecosystem bigger. Theoretical analysis and experiments validate the proposed method, respectively.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available