Cited by 123Blockchain Technology Applications and SecurityFood Supply Chain TraceabilityFood Safety and Hygiene

Method of Reaching Consensus on Probability of Food Safety Based on the Integration of Finite Credible Data on Block Chain

Open access
Yan, Li, Yin-He, Sun, Qian, Yang, Zhi-Yu, Sun, Chun-Zi, Wang, Zi-Yun, Liu·2021·IEEE Access

Abstract

The use of new technologies to empower the social co-governance of food safety is a consensus in the theoretical and practical fields of food safety governance modernization. Based on the innovative features of the block chain such as non-tampering, consensus mechanism, and a smart contract, this paper proposes a new method to facilitate the achievement of the effect of social co-governance of food safety. Firstly, it provides a profound analysis of the causes of food safety problems and the drawbacks of traditional centralized supervision, and proposes a solution with decentralized features and the design process of smart contracts to realize the chaining and integration of finite credible data in the process of food circulation; secondly, it constructs a mathematical model through finite credible data on the chain and obtains the probabilistic consensus results of food safety through rigorous derivation; Finally, the scheme, model and algorithm are effectively practiced through the experimental environment of mature block chain platform and provincial food supervision platform. The example shows that the market failure problem in food safety can be greatly alleviated by the non-tampering feature of block chain; the consensus results formed by the credible data uploading, model construction and data derivation through smart contracts can greatly alleviate the problem of involution of government administrative supervision; and the social co-governance capacity of food safety can be improved through information sharing with the active synergy of multiple subjects of co-governance.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/access.2021.3108178

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A. Yan, Yin-He, et al. (2021)'s two-stream technique results outperformed previous work on deepfakes, FaceSwap, Face2Face, NeuralTextures, and Celeb-DF datasets.

    “They tested their suggested two-stream technique on deepfakes, FaceSwap, Face2Face, NeuralTextures, and Celeb-DF datasets, and the results outperformed previous work.”

    From Deepfake detection using deep learning methods: A systematic and comprehensive review (2024) · cites this paper as A. Yan, Yin-He, et al. (2021)

    The Experimental Environment and Feasibility Analysis sections describe a blockchain-based food-safety system, not a two-stream deepfake-detection technique. Searches for the named datasets and for a two-stream technique outperforming prior work found no passage addressing the claim in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A. Yan, Yin-He, et al. (2021)'s approach is robust to compression factors.

    “The accuracy of cross-compression detection findings demonstrates that their approach is robust to compression factors.”

    From Deepfake detection using deep learning methods: A systematic and comprehensive review (2024) · cites this paper as A. Yan, Yin-He, et al. (2021)

    The Numerical Solution and Data Security sections discuss a food-safety blockchain model and resistance to data tampering, not cross-compression detection. Searches for cross-compression accuracy and compression factors found no passage in our copy addressing the claimed robustness. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • L. Yan, Yin-He, et al. (2021)'s network has fewer parameters than other networks and outperforms existing state-of-the-art deepfake detection techniques on major deepfake data sets.

    “The results demonstrate that their network has fewer parameters than other networks and outperforms existing state-of-the-art deepfake detection techniques on major deepfake data sets.”

    From Deepfake detection using deep learning methods: A systematic and comprehensive review (2024) · cites this paper as L. Yan, Yin-He, et al. (2021)

    The Experimental Environment and Data Security sections describe a blockchain platform for food-safety data and tests of resistance to data tampering. Searches for deepfake detection, network parameter counts, and comparisons with state-of-the-art methods found no passage addressing the claim in our copy. No page numbers were provided for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. Cachin C. "Architecture of the Hyperledger block chain fabric//Proceedings of the Workshop on Distributed Cryptocurrencies and Consensus Ledgers (DCCL)," Chicago, USA, 2016.
  2. Shao Qifeng, Jin Cheqing, Zhang Zao, Qian Weining and Zhou Aoying. "Blockchain technology: architecture and progress," Journal of Computer Science, vol. 041, no..005, pp. 969-988, 2018.
  3. Yuan Y, Ni XC, Zeng SH, and Wang FY. "Current status and outlook of blockchain consensus algorithm development," Journal of Automation, vol.044, no.011, pp.2011-2022,2018.
  4. Cai W.D., Yu L., Wang R., Liu N., and Deng E.Y. "Research on blockchain-based application system development method," Journal of Software, vol.28, no.06, pp.1474-1487, 2017.
  5. Bian Hongbiao. "Process wisdom and experience of food safety regulation in China," Journal of Food Safety and Quality Inspection, vol.12, no.04, pp.1600-1606, 2021.
  6. Wang Yang. "Food and drug safety focuses on supervision," Seeking truth, vol. 000, no.016, pp.3-6,2013.
  7. Liu, P., Liu, J. and Li, H. "Comprehensive absorption of professional: the logic of food and drug safety regulatory system reform in the context of decentralization." Journal of South China Normal University (Social Science Edition), vol.06, pp.100-108+190-191, 2018.
  8. Pupin Chen. "Comparison and reference of foreign food safety social governance system." World Agriculture, vol.09, no.461, pp.176-181, 2017.
  9. Hu Yinglian. "Basic framework of national food safety strategy." China Soft Science, vol.9, pp.18-27, 2016.
  10. Wang Keshan, Liu Jiaxuan, and Cui Yanmei. "Frontier hotspots and dynamic trends of food safety governance research in China." Journal of Beijing Administrative College, vol.4, pp.35-44, 2019.
  11. Wang Y. "Application of big data in China's food and drug wisdom supervision." China Food and Drug Administration, vol.05, pp.44-47, 2018.
  12. M Kõlvart, M. Poola, and A. Rull. "Smart Contracts." DE: Springer International Publishing, 2016.
  13. He, H. W., Yan, A. and Chen, Z. H. "A review of blockchain-based smart contract technologies and applications." Computer Research and Development, vol.55, no.11, pp.112-126, 2018.
  14. Sheng Nianzu, et al: "A block chain smart contract-based approach to IoT data assetization." Journal of Zhejiang University: engineering edition, vol.52, no.11, pp. 2150-2158, 2018.
  15. Ye CC, Li GQ, Cai HM and Gu YG. "Security detection model of block chain." Ruan Jian Xue Bao/Journal of Software, vol.29, no.5, pp.1348-1359, 2018.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yan, L., Yin-He, S., Qian, Y., Zhi-Yu, S., Chun-Zi, W., & Zi-Yun, L.
Venue
IEEE Access
Published
2021
Volume
9
Pages
123764-123776
ISSN
2169-3536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3197813564
Cited by
123
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 73 · 2022: 28
FWCI
25.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Access (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Social Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province (2020F014)
  • Special Project of Shaanxi Provincial Department of Education to Serve Local Areas (19JC015)
  • Project of Xi’an Science and Technology University Talents Service Enterprise (GXYD7.7)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Supply Chain Traceability
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Safety and Hygiene
Keywords
food safety, blockchain, smart contracts, consensus algorithms, social co-governance, food supply chain, food safety governance, market failure, information sharing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review