The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 14 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Blockchain-based System Evaluation: The Effectiveness of Blockchain on E-Procurements
Open accessAbstract
Electronic systems tend to simplify the tedious traditional scheme and basically focuses on the platform design and process organization.The integrity of the output of an automated system is not left behind but the possibility of internal manipulation is still high.This paper presents the current issues in company procurements and the solution in the form of blockchain technology.Several individuals and professionals were asked to evaluate a blockchain-based procurement system in comparison to the current electronic (e-procurement) system.A blockchain-based system has the capability to hold transactional data with complete decentralization and eliminate the growing number of fraud cases in companies and organizations.This paper mainly focuses on the effectiveness of a blockchain-based system in company procurements.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
14 Not checked yet · 8 Own interpretation · 7 Own result · 2 Own method
In the paper
“While mainly focusing on process efficiency and cost reduction, fraud and corruption is still present in the system [8].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] 8. D. Johnson, A. Menezes, and S. Vanstone. The elliptic curve digital signature algorithm (ecdsa), International Journal of Information Security, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 36-63, 2001.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This data suggests that the amount of the reported fraud in the organization is concentrated in the upper hierarchy.”
hedgedstates an associationn = 63- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 16
- Probably not a substantial claim. 17
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“71.87% of the respondents strongly agrees, 18.75% agrees, and 9.38% are undecided that the bidding processes were conducted correctly and according to the indicated timeframe.”
plainn = 64- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In terms of safety and security, the result shows that 82.81% of the respondents strongly agrees, 4.61% agrees, and 12.5% are undecided that blockchain notarization features for a tamper-proof contract and bid receipt is useful in securing digital documents.”
plainn = 64- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“84.37% of the respondents strongly agrees, and 15.63% agrees that the presence of a Know-Your-Customer verification feature for checking the identity of the user is an effective way of ensuring that the participants of the platform is legitimate.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Meanwhile, 71.87% of the respondents strongly agrees, 25% agrees, and 3.13% are undecided that time is saved by using the online platform.”
plainn = 64- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“67.19% of the respondents strongly agrees, 23.43% agrees, and 9.38% are undecided that the file auditing feature for checking the legitimacy of the file is effective.”
plainn = 64- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In terms of efficiency, 54.89% of the respondents strongly agrees, 39.06% agrees, and 6.25% are undecided that using an electronic and automated system from purchase posting up to the issuance of contract is efficient.”
plainn = 64- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“71.87% of the respondents strongly agrees, 25% agrees, and 3.13% are undecided that transactions conducted are completely immutable.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A blockchain-based system has the capability to hold transactional data with complete decentralization and eliminate the growing number of fraud cases in companies and organizations.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this paper, blockchain integration on a simple electronic procurement platform is introduced, utilizing blockchain notarization, digital signature, and multisignature protocol for better security while achieving cost-efficiency.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The survey responses from the 64 verified users accurately reflect the effectiveness of the blockchain-based procurement system.
- Rests on an assumption: The 64 survey respondents are representative of the broader population of procurement users.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This study is a step forward to achieving a trust-less environment showing how a paperless transaction with the use of blockchain technology can guarantee a better security.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The survey responses from the 64 verified users accurately reflect the effectiveness of the blockchain-based procurement system.
- Rests on an assumption: The 64 survey respondents are representative of the broader population of procurement users.
In the paper
“It can be triggered when certain conditions are met [7].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [7] 7. M. Thomas and V. S. Chooralil. Security and Privacy via Optimised Blockchain, International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 415-418, 2019. https://doi.org/10.30534/ijatcse/2019/14832019
plainstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The digital asset fingerprint can be checked on the blockchain to ensure that the information is legitimate and untampered.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Blockchain-based systems promote data immutability and even more cost reduction when applied in electronic systems.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Even though electronic systems can promote efficiency and cost reduction [1], the possibility of internal manipulation by the governing authority is still present in the picture.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1] 1. M. Jae Moon. E-procurement management in state governments: Diffusion of e-procurement practices and its determinants, Journal of Public Procurement, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 54-72, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOPP-05-01-2005-B003
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Blockchain smart contracts have the capacity to disrupt various fields in financial services and Internet of Things (IoT) [4].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [4] 4. Z. Zheng, S. Xie, H. Dai, X. Chen and H. Wang. An Overview of Blockchain Technology: Architecture, Consensus, and Future Trends, in 2017 IEEE International Congress on Big Data (BigData Congress), 2017, pp. 557-564. https://doi.org/10.1109/BigDataCongress.2017.85
plainstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In addition, the identity of the participants is also protected [9].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] 9. M. Turkanović, M. Hölbl, K. Košič, M. Heričko and A. Kamišalić. EduCTX: A Blockchain-Based Higher Education Credit Platform, IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 5112-5127, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2789929
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Asset misappropriation is at 53%, followed by business misconduct at 38% and procurement fraud at 35%.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [16]
plainn = 63- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Electronic procurements made a significant change in how companies source goods and services, achieving a better and more cost-effective process [1].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1] 1. M. Jae Moon. E-procurement management in state governments: Diffusion of e-procurement practices and its determinants, Journal of Public Procurement, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 54-72, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOPP-05-01-2005-B003
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The technology also has the capability to embed a very small data in the transactions for other useful purposes, such as representing digital assets (e.g., document notarization) [3]- [7].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3]- [7]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Cost efficiency is achieved by cutting out intermediaries while achieving a high level of security [3].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3] 3. X. Xu et al. A Taxonomy of Blockchain-Based Systems for Architecture Design, in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture (ICSA), 2017, pp. 243-252.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With this scheme of ordering transactional data, the blockchain cannot be manipulated without invalidating the previous chain of hashes.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Based on the survey 98% of the 63 respondents indicated that they have knowledge of fraud incidents in their organization.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [16]
hedgedn = 63- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Multi-level multisignature accounts enables “AND/OR” logic to blockchain transactions [10].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [10] 10. Creating a multi-level multisig account (MLMA) - NEM Developer Center, Nemtech.github.io. [Online]. Available: https://nemtech.github.io/guides/account/creating-a-mul ti-level-multisig-account.html.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The program is limited to the ranking of supplier's bid according to price.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Verifying a message is checking the received data using the public key of the sender, in this way the integrity of the received data can be verified [8].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] 8. D. Johnson, A. Menezes, and S. Vanstone. The elliptic curve digital signature algorithm (ecdsa), International Journal of Information Security, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 36-63, 2001.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Blockchain network provides a “trust-less” environment, transactions do not rely on a centralized authority [2].”
- Also stated in: § 3. PROCUREMENT FRAUD · plain
“Blockchain promotes a “trust-less” environment where transactions are not governed by a central authority, promoting complete decentralization [2].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2] 2. P. Zhang, M. A. Walker, J. White, D. C. Schmidt, and G. Lenz. Metrics for assessing blockchain-based healthcare decentralized apps, in 2017 IEEE 19th International Conference on e-Health Networking, Applications and Services (Healthcom), 2017, pp. 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1109/HealthCom.2017.8210842
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 3. PROCUREMENT FRAUD · plain
In the paper
“Procurement fraud is the third leading economic crime in the Philippines based on the 2018 Global Economic Crime and Fraud Survey conducted by PwC [16].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [16]
plainn = 63- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To measure the effectiveness of the blockchain-based online procurement system, a survey was developed to collect empirical data from verified users of the site.”
plainn = 64- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This type of internal issue cannot be easily resolved and detected.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper relies on this without support.
The survey responses from the 64 verified users accurately reflect the effectiveness of the blockchain-based procurement system.
“To measure the effectiveness of the blockchain-based online procurement system, a survey was developed to collect empirical data from verified users of the site.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The 64 survey respondents are representative of the broader population of procurement users.
“The survey was circulated to a total of 64 respondents and utilized the five-level Likert Scale.”
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Table 1 identifies all the issues involved with public sector projects after investigating various projects/samples from Bangladesh, Denmark, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nigeria, the Netherlands, the OECD, Pakistan, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam [9,27,34-41].”
From Blockchain Technology: Potential Applications for Public Sector E-Procurement and Project Management (2022) · cites this paper as [41]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Blockchain-based project management will enable them to do all the procurement processes online [41].”
From Blockchain Technology: Potential Applications for Public Sector E-Procurement and Project Management (2022) · cites this paper as [41]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, introducing Blockchain for tender evaluation will resolve the main issues related to procurement [41].”
From Blockchain Technology: Potential Applications for Public Sector E-Procurement and Project Management (2022) · cites this paper as [41]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Thio-Ac et al. [41] explained that those three components are a digital asset, digital signature, and multi-signature protocol, as shown in Figure 3.”
From Blockchain Technology: Potential Applications for Public Sector E-Procurement and Project Management (2022) · cites this paper as [41]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“The lowest bidder issue is one of the common and important issues discussed by the different researchers [32,36,41].”
From Blockchain Technology: Potential Applications for Public Sector E-Procurement and Project Management (2022) · cites this paper as [41]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Due to this, infrastructure-related public sector projects are delayed in developing countries [41,57].”
From Blockchain Technology: Potential Applications for Public Sector E-Procurement and Project Management (2022) · cites this paper as [41]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“All the associated members of different organisations, and even top management, will be able to follow the task during the project's duration [41,51].”
From Blockchain Technology: Potential Applications for Public Sector E-Procurement and Project Management (2022) · cites this paper as [41]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“The delay in the tendering process is a common problem in developing countries.”
From Blockchain Technology: Potential Applications for Public Sector E-Procurement and Project Management (2022) · cites this paper as [41]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ 6. DATA AND RESULTS
“54.89% of the respondents strongly agrees, 39.06% agrees, and 6.25% are undecided that using an electronic and automated system from purchase posting up to the issuance of contract is efficient.”
§ 6. DATA AND RESULTS
“The survey was circulated to a total of 64 respondents and utilized the five-level Likert Scale.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ 6. DATA AND RESULTS
“82.81% of the respondents strongly agrees, 4.61% agrees, and 12.5% are undecided that blockchain notarization features for a tamper-proof contract and bid receipt is useful in securing digital documents.”
§ 6. DATA AND RESULTS
“The survey was circulated to a total of 64 respondents and utilized the five-level Likert Scale.”
Citations
Cites
An Overview of Blockchain Technology: Architecture, Consensus, and Future Trends
Zheng, Z., Xie, S., Dai, H., Chen, X., & Wang, H. (2017) · 2017 IEEE International Congress on Big Data (BigData Congress) · doi:10.1109/bigdatacongress.2017.85 · Cited by 4,515
EduCTX: A Blockchain-Based Higher Education Credit Platform
Turkanović, M., Hölbl, M., Košič, K., Heričko, M., & Kamišalić, A. (2018) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2018.2789929 · Cited by 818
Metrics for assessing blockchain-based healthcare decentralized apps
Zhang, P., Walker, M. A., White, J., Schmidt, D. C., & Lenz, G. (2017) · IEEE International Conference on e-Health Networking, Applications and Services (Healthcom) · doi:10.1109/healthcom.2017.8210842 · Cited by 225
Moon, M. J. (2005) · Journal of Public Procurement · doi:10.1108/jopp-05-01-2005-b003 · Cited by 148
Security and Privacy via Optimised Blockchain
Thomas, M. (2019) · International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering · doi:10.30534/ijatcse/2019/14832019 · Cited by 18
Nekrasenko, L. (2019) · International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering · doi:10.30534/ijatcse/2019/5481.12019 · Cited by 7
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- [3]3. X. Xu et al. A Taxonomy of Blockchain-Based Systems for Architecture Design, in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture (ICSA), 2017, pp. 243-252.
- [6]6. A. Sharma, Y. K. Awasthi, et al. Hyperledger: Contemporary Technique to Resolve the Issue of Cross Border Payment, International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering, vol. 8, no. 1.2, pp. 26-34, 2019.
- [8]8. D. Johnson, A. Menezes, and S. Vanstone. The elliptic curve digital signature algorithm (ecdsa), International Journal of Information Security, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 36-63, 2001.
- [11]11. R. T. M. Cruz, L. K. S. Tolentino, R. O. Serfa Juan, and H. S. Kim. IoT-based Monitoring Model for Pre-Cognitive Impairment using pH Level as Analyte, International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 711-718, 2019.
- [12]12. B. N. Fortaleza, R. O. Serfa Juan, and L. K. S. Tolentino. IoT-based Pico-Hydro Power Generation System Using Pelton Turbine, Journal of Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering (JTEC), vol. 10, no. 1-4, pp. 189-192, 2018.
- [13]13. L. K. Tolentino, K. T. Lapuz, R. J. Corvera, A. De Guzman, V. J. Española, C. Gambota, and A. Gungon. AquaDroid: An App for Aquaponics Control and Monitoring, in 6 th International Conference on Civil Engineering (6 th ICCE 2017), 2017, pp. 1-8.
- [14]14. R. Jorda, Jr., C. Alcabasa, A. Buhay, E. C. Dela Cruz, J. P. Mendoza, A. Tolentino, L. K. Tolentino, E. Fernandez, A. Thio-ac, J. Velasco, and N. Arago. Automated Smart Wick System-Based Microfarm Using Internet of Things, in Lecture Notes on Research and Innovation in Computer Engineering and Computer Sciences, 2019, pp. 68-74.
- [15]15. E. Galido, L. K. Tolentino, B. Fortaleza, R. J. Corvera, A. De Guzman, V. J. Española, C. Gambota, A. Gungon, K. T. Lapuz, N. Arago, J. Velasco, and R. Jorda, Jr. Development of a Solar-powered Smart Aquaponics System through Internet of Things (IoT), in Lecture Notes on Research and Innovation in Computer Engineering and Computer Sciences, 2019, pp. 31-39. Economic crime and fraud: Act now before it hits you, 2018 Global Economic and Fraud Survey -The Philippine Report, pp. 6-23. [Online]. Available: https://www.pwc.com/ph/fraudsurvey
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Althabatah, A., Yaqot, M., Menezes, B., & Kerbache, L. (2023) · Logistics · doi:10.3390/logistics7030063 · Cited by 108
“Smart Contracts play an essential role in procurement and they have been increasingly used in many industries due to many features, including automatic execution, nontempering in the blockchain environment, and transparency [4].”
BackgroundBlockchain Technology: Potential Applications for Public Sector E-Procurement and Project Management
Khalfan, M., Azizi, N., Haass, O., Maqsood, T., & Ahmed, I. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su14105791 · Cited by 57
“Table 1 identifies all the issues involved with public sector projects after investigating various projects/samples from Bangladesh, Denmark, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nigeria, the Netherlands, the OECD, Pakistan, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam [9,…”
BackgroundInfluentialSmart Contract and Blockchain for Crowdfunding Platform
Ashari, F. (2020) · International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering · doi:10.30534/ijatcse/2020/83932020 · Cited by 42
Internet of things-based (IoT) inventory monitoring refrigerator using arduino sensor network
Velasco, J., Alberto, L., Ambatali, H. D., Canilang, M., Daria, V., Liwanag, J. B., & Madrigal, G. A. M. (2020) · Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science · doi:10.11591/ijeecs.v18.i1.pp508-515 · Cited by 19
Blockchain Framework for Securing E-Learning System
Ubaka-Okoye, M. N. (2020) · International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering · doi:10.30534/ijatcse/2020/68932020 · Cited by 18
Metadata
- Authors
- Technological University of the Philippines, P., & Thio-ac, A.
- Corresponding author
- Thio-ac, August
- Venue
- International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering
- Published
- 2019-10-15
- Pages
- 2673-2676
- ISSN
- 2278-3091 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2988179760
- Cited by
- 21
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2020: 6
- FWCI
- 3.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- University of the Philippines
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Public Procurement and Policy
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology in Education and Learning
- Keywords
- blockchain, e-procurement, procurement systems, decentralization (distributed systems), fraud prevention, transaction integrity, e-procurement systems
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Blockchain-based System Evaluation: The Effectiveness of Blockchain on E-Procurements. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.30534/ijatcse/2019/122852019
- The paper
- Technological University of the Philippines, P., & Thio-ac, A. (2019). Blockchain-based System Evaluation: The Effectiveness of Blockchain on E-Procurements. International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering. https://doi.org/10.30534/ijatcse/2019/122852019
