Blockchain Smart Contract to Prevent Forgery of Degree Certificates: Artificial Intelligence Consensus Algorithm

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors deals with the required Blockchain diploma. In addition, the authors used automatic translation system, which is natural language processing, to perform verification work that does not require an existing public certificate. The hash algorithm is used to authenticate security. The authors proposed to use these security protocols to provide more secure data protection.

Significant: yes, the paper is a significant advance or contribution.

Supported: Mostly yes,

Referencing: some additions are necessary, I suggest the authors the following papers for reading:

BSTProv: Blockchain-Based Secure and Trustworthy Data Provenance Sharing. Electronics 2022, 11, 1489. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11091489
A Novel Smart Contract Vulnerability Detection Method Based on Information Graph and Ensemble Learning. Sensors 2022, 22, 3581. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22093581
Blockchain-Enabled Transaction Scanning Method for Money Laundering Detection. Electronics 2021, 10, 1766. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10151766
Technical Sustainability of Cloud-Based Blockchain Integrated with Machine Learning for Supply Chain Management. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8270. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158270
"A Blockchain-Based Traceability System in Agri-Food SME: Case Study of a Traditional Bakery," in IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 62899-62915, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3074874.
Wireless Sensor Network in Agriculture: Model of Cyber Security. Sensors 2020, 20, 6747. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20236747
Blockchain-Enabled Transaction Scanning Method for Money Laundering Detection. Electronics 2021, 10, 1766. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10151766
Technical Sustainability of Cloud-Based Blockchain Integrated with Machine Learning for Supply Chain Management. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8270. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158270

Quality: The organization of the manuscript and presentation some improvement.
I suggest to the authors to increase the sections 3 and 5. The paper is not clear. I also recommend major reorganisation of the paper.

Author Response

Author's Reply to the Review Report (Reviewer 1)

 

Please provide a point-by-point response to the reviewer’s comments and either enter it in the box below or upload it as a Word/PDF file. Please write down "Please see the attachment." in the box if you only upload an attachment. An example can be found here.

 

Open Review

( ) I would not like to sign my review report

(x) I would like to sign my review report

English language and style

( ) Extensive editing of English language and style required

( ) Moderate English changes required

( ) English language and style are fine/minor spell check required

(x) I don't feel qualified to judge about the English language and style

Yes      Can be improved    Must be improved  Not applicable

Does the introduction provide sufficient background and include all relevant references?

( )        ( )        (x)       ( )

Are all the cited references relevant to the research?

( )        ( )        (x)       ( )

Is the research design appropriate?

( )        ( )        (x)       ( )

Are the methods adequately described?

( )        ( )        (x)       ( )

Are the results clearly presented?

( )        ( )        (x)       ( )

Are the conclusions supported by the results?

( )        ( )        (x)       ( )

 

 

 

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors deals with the required Blockchain diploma. In addition, the authors used automatic translation system, which is natural language processing, to perform verification work that does not require an existing public certificate. The hash algorithm is used to authenticate security. The authors proposed to use these security protocols to provide more secure data protection.

 

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation.

 

3.2.5 Block Verification MD5 and HAS-160

Both the MD5 and HAS-160 hash algorithms consist of four rounds, but the stages of each round are different. Each round of the MD5 consists of 16 stages, while the HAS-160 consists of 20 stages. As mentioned earlier, the two hash algorithms receive input and process in 512-bit increments, but for the final output, MD5 outputs 128 bits and HAS-160 outputs 160 bits. In addition, for the initial value, the number of bits equal to the output bit can be used as the initial value, so MD5 is 128 bits, whereas HAS-160 uses 160 bits. However, one feature here is that the default initialization constant values of the four 32-bit bits use the same values in the two hash functions. For HAS-160, additional 32-bit initial values are provided only. 512 bits are represented by 16 32 bits. And 16 32-bit values provided as inputs are accessed from the hash function. In this case, the MD5 hash function is randomly accessed while performing step 64 out of 16 input functions. However, in the case of the HAS-160 hash function, four additional input values are generated and used for each round. It reduces the complexity of implementing round functions by pre-generating a total of 16 additional inputs (four rounds x four = 16 pieces) to be used when receiving 512-bit inputs in the diploma security algorithm, storing them in dual port memory, and providing them when performing round functions. The MD5 and HAS-160 seawater algorithms have FGHI() functions. It can be seen that the FGHI() function uses different functions for each round, but the MD5 and HAS-160 hash algorithms use similar Boolean functions. The integrated hash algorithm does not require eight boolean functions, and if you share a common boolean function, you can provide five boolean functions. This is a summary of the FGHI() Boolean function of the MD5 and HAS-160 hash algorithms and the constant values used in each round. In the case of constant values, MD5 requires 64 because different constant values are used for each step, and in the case of HAS-160, only 4 constant values are required because the same value is used per round. The following is a summary of the left-hand rotation used in the single-step operation of the two hash algorithms. The left-hand rotation used by the MD5 hash algorithm uses four values in each round, which is repeated It is used. And in the HAS-160 hash algorithm, 20 values are repeatedly used 4 times in the case of S1, and in the case for S2.

 

Figure 5. MD5 and HAS-160 hash algorithms for Diploma Certificate

 

Significant: yes, the paper is a significant advance or contribution.

Supported: Mostly yes,

Referencing: some additions are necessary, I suggest the authors the following papers for reading:

 

BSTProv: Blockchain-Based Secure and Trustworthy Data Provenance Sharing. Electronics 2022, 11, 1489. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11091489.

A Novel Smart Contract Vulnerability Detection Method Based on Information Graph and Ensemble Learning. Sensors 2022, 22, 3581. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22093581.

Blockchain-Enabled Transaction Scanning Method for Money Laundering Detection. Electronics 2021, 10, 1766. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10151766.

Technical Sustainability of Cloud-Based Blockchain Integrated with Machine Learning for Supply Chain Management. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8270. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158270.

"A Blockchain-Based Traceability System in Agri-Food SME: Case Study of a Traditional Bakery," in IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 62899-62915, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3074874.

Wireless Sensor Network in Agriculture: Model of Cyber Security. Sensors 2020, 20, 6747. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20236747.

Blockchain-Enabled Transaction Scanning Method for Money Laundering Detection. Electronics 2021, 10, 1766. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10151766.

Technical Sustainability of Cloud-Based Blockchain Integrated with Machine Learning for Supply Chain Management. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8270. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158270.

 

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation. Reference added.

 

39. BSTProv: Blockchain-Based Secure and Trustworthy Data Provenance Sharing. Electronics 2022, 11, 1489. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11091489.

 

40. A Novel Smart Contract Vulnerability Detection Method Based on Information Graph and Ensemble Learning. Sensors 2022, 22, 3581. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22093581.

 

41. Blockchain-Enabled Transaction Scanning Method for Money Laundering Detection. Electronics 2021, 10, 1766. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10151766.

 

42. Technical Sustainability of Cloud-Based Blockchain Integrated with Machine Learning for Supply Chain Man-agement. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8270. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158270.

 

43. "A Blockchain-Based Traceability System in Agri-Food SME: Case Study of a Traditional Bakery," in IEEE Ac-cess, vol. 9, pp. 62899-62915, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3074874.

 

44. Wireless Sensor Network in Agriculture: Model of Cyber Security. Sensors 2020, 20, 6747. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20236747.

 

45. Blockchain-Enabled Transaction Scanning Method for Money Laundering Detection. Electronics 2021, 10, 1766. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10151766.

 

46. Technical Sustainability of Cloud-Based Blockchain Integrated with Machine Learning for Supply Chain Man-agement. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8270. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158270.

 

Quality: The organization of the manuscript and presentation some improvement.

I suggest to the authors to increase the sections 3 and 5. The paper is not clear. I also recommend major reorganisation of the paper.

 

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation. Chapter 3 and 5 were updated to improve the quality.

 

3.2.5 Block Verification MD5 and HAS-160

Both the MD5 and HAS-160 hash algorithms consist of four rounds, but the stages of each round are different. Each round of the MD5 consists of 16 stages, while the HAS-160 consists of 20 stages. As mentioned earlier, the two hash algorithms receive input and process in 512-bit increments, but for the final output, MD5 outputs 128 bits and HAS-160 outputs 160 bits. In addition, for the initial value, the number of bits equal to the output bit can be used as the initial value, so MD5 is 128 bits, whereas HAS-160 uses 160 bits. However, one feature here is that the default initialization constant values of the four 32-bit bits use the same values in the two hash functions. For HAS-160, additional 32-bit initial values are provided only. 512 bits are represented by 16 32 bits. And 16 32-bit values provided as inputs are accessed from the hash function. In this case, the MD5 hash function is randomly accessed while performing step 64 out of 16 input functions. However, in the case of the HAS-160 hash function, four additional input values are generated and used for each round. It reduces the complexity of implementing round functions by pre-generating a total of 16 additional inputs (four rounds x four = 16 pieces) to be used when receiving 512-bit inputs in the diploma security algorithm, storing them in dual port memory, and providing them when performing round functions. The MD5 and HAS-160 seawater algorithms have FGHI() functions. It can be seen that the FGHI() function uses different functions for each round, but the MD5 and HAS-160 hash algorithms use similar Boolean functions. The integrated hash algorithm does not require eight boolean functions, and if you share a common boolean function, you can provide five boolean functions. This is a summary of the FGHI() Boolean function of the MD5 and HAS-160 hash algorithms and the constant values used in each round. In the case of constant values, MD5 requires 64 because different constant values are used for each step, and in the case of HAS-160, only 4 constant values are required because the same value is used per round. The following is a summary of the left-hand rotation used in the single-step operation of the two hash algorithms. The left-hand rotation used by the MD5 hash algorithm uses four values in each round, which is repeated It is used. And in the HAS-160 hash algorithm, 20 values are repeatedly used 4 times in the case of S1, and in the case for S2.

 

Figure 5. MD5 and HAS-160 hash algorithms for Diploma Certificate

 

5.3 Classification of Motions

First, the game was designed and developed to write all the data in the game on the blockchain so that the transaction can be performed excessively as much as the commercial service on the blockchain. It is not necessary for ordinary blockchain DApp to list all Transactions on the chain. However, this test needs to overestimate the number of these transactions in securing test results that are expected to be huge services through limited users. Accordingly, all transactions are designed to be described on the chain.

Second, games developed to create a test environment were distributed and installed on cloud servers in six global regions. The test was also performed for about 15 days.

Third, based on the number of Transactions collected through tests and Transaction Per Second (TPS), improved performance and scalability were verified through comparison with the existing blockchain platform or DApp's Transaction Issue and TPS.

In addition, based on this, this study aimed to measure chain performance in a test environment similar to a commercial environment that could not be measured with the existing methodology. The blockchain records all the history of Transaction in the distributed ledger. In the case of a general public blockchain, the distributed ledger is open to all, and through this, the user can trust the transaction history recorded in the ledger without a third party or a trust agency that guarantees the history. Based on this technical understanding, distributed applications (DApps) have emerged, and the computational history of these DApps is also disclosed to everyone through the portal site. In general, in the blockchain industry, such portal sites are called Block Explorer. Block Explorer lets users know the content and history of Transaction, the number, and success/failure. Accordingly, this paper selected one type of blockchain platform to verify performance by implementing the game, and developed one type of block explorer that can view diploma data and maximum TPS, Transaction, and Block history. In addition, the goal is to secure data for use equivalent to the actual environment through the overuse of transaction records recorded on the distributed ledger of the blockchain, so all data generated in the game is designed to be recorded in the distributed ledger.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I read the paper with great interest. This paper can be considered for publication if the authors incorporate the following suggestions in the paper.

The presentation and writing of the paper should be improved.

The paper should be set according to the journal’s format.

Some latest and close references are missing

How the proposed study differs from the existing studies?

The real example should be added and discussed with the existing studies

What are the limitations of the study?

What are the potential applications of the proposed study?

Neutrosophic statistics is the extension of classical statistics and is applied when the data is coming from a complex process or from an uncertain environment. The current study can be extended using neutrosophic statistics as future research. The statement that the proposed study can be extended for neutrosophic statistics can be added by citing some papers on neutrosophic statistics.

Author Response

Author's Reply to the Review Report (Reviewer 2)

 

Open Review

(x) I would not like to sign my review report

( ) I would like to sign my review report

English language and style

( ) Extensive editing of English language and style required

( ) Moderate English changes required

( ) English language and style are fine/minor spell check required

(x) I don't feel qualified to judge about the English language and style

 

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

I read the paper with great interest. This paper can be considered for publication if the authors incorporate the following suggestions in the paper.

 

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation.

 

 

The presentation and writing of the paper should be improved.

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation. The overall improvement was made.

 

The paper should be set according to the journal’s format.

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation. I adapted my paper to the format of the journal.

 

Some latest and close references are missing

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation. I added the latest research reference.

39. BSTProv: Blockchain-Based Secure and Trustworthy Data Provenance Sharing. Electronics 2022, 11, 1489. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11091489.

 

40. A Novel Smart Contract Vulnerability Detection Method Based on Information Graph and Ensemble Learning. Sensors 2022, 22, 3581. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22093581.

 

41. Blockchain-Enabled Transaction Scanning Method for Money Laundering Detection. Electronics 2021, 10, 1766. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10151766.

 

42. Technical Sustainability of Cloud-Based Blockchain Integrated with Machine Learning for Supply Chain Man-agement. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8270. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158270.

 

43. "A Blockchain-Based Traceability System in Agri-Food SME: Case Study of a Traditional Bakery," in IEEE Ac-cess, vol. 9, pp. 62899-62915, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3074874.

 

44. Wireless Sensor Network in Agriculture: Model of Cyber Security. Sensors 2020, 20, 6747. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20236747.

 

45. Blockchain-Enabled Transaction Scanning Method for Money Laundering Detection. Electronics 2021, 10, 1766. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10151766.

 

46. Technical Sustainability of Cloud-Based Blockchain Integrated with Machine Learning for Supply Chain Man-agement. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8270. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158270.

 

 

How the proposed study differs from the existing studies?

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation.

3.2. Research Methodology

In addition, the difference from existing studies is that hybrid blockchain can be verified in all aspects. All transactions arising from hybrid blockchain can be conducted privately, and if necessary, the transaction details can be opened for verification. Each transaction can be written only once because it uses a blockchain. After that, you cannot change the transaction details. However, blockchain users can fully participate in blockchain activities once they have been granted access. You can make transactions, view other transaction details, or add or modify transactions. However, to protect the privacy of other users, their identity is kept secret. And when one user contacts another, his identity is revealed only when the person directly reveals it. Therefore, companies and organizations perform tasks by performing KYC so that the identification process of the hybrid blockchain is performed correctly. In particular, financial institutions need to respond correctly because they do not have the authority to allow users to make transactions without exposing their personal information to the blockchain. Even if hybrid blockchain restricts anonymity to users participating in the network, public anonymity is maintained. No one outside the network can know about the blockchain user. Hybrid networks provide all the important functions of public blockchain such as security, transparency, immutable, and decentralization. However, it restricts access to transaction details, seeing him, or changing transactions in any way. In addition, it limits the user's permissions to prevent confidential information from leaking out of the network.

 

The real example should be added and discussed with the existing studies

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation. Updated comparison analysis with previous research.

 

5.4 Comparison with previous studies

Table 2 compares the performance between VISA and the existing blockchain platform and expresses it as a percentage. Based on this, it can be seen that the maxi-mum acceptance TPS of the Ethereum platform used by the majority of DApps is about 30 TPS, which shows 0.125% performance compared to the most representative VISA among financial services, and only 15% performance compared to PayPal. Considering that PayPal is a single fintech service, the performance of Ethereum, a driving platform for various DApps, will be further evaluated. On the other hand, the maximum TPS of DApp, the system presented in this study, was 4,000. It was verified that the platform under evaluation showed at least 50 times more performance than the maximum TPS of Ethereum's entire chain based on the maximum TPS of a single DApp in a commer-cial service environment.

 

 

Table 2: Comparison with previous studies

Blockchain Project  Name	Year of  release	Maximum TPS(Internal test)	Performance versus VISA
Bitcoin	2009	10	0.0417%
Ethereum	2015	30	0.125%
Eos	2018	3,000	12.5%
Our blockchain	2022	4,000	17.8%

 

What are the limitations of the study?

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation.

 

7. Conclusion and Future Work

In addition, the limitations of the study were that this study proposed and developed a meaningful tool model to verify the scalability and performance of the blockchain platform, but also had the following limitations. It cannot be said that the maximum TPS is absolutely higher than the amount of activity in general IT commercial services. Therefore, there is a limitation in concluding that both the performance and scalability of the general IT commercial service level of the platform to be verified based on the data from this study. However, considering that a large amount of usage has been collected compared to the existing DApp, it can be supplemented by conducting tests on more users in the future. Second, the results of this study were validated only in a virtual environment. Usually, services using blockchain platforms generally use Bitcoin's finance as it covers various services such as logistics, medical care, and the environment in Lohae, it is necessary to verify them through development and testing in other environments in the future.

 

What are the potential applications of the proposed study?

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation.

 

5.3 Classification of Motions

First, the game was designed and developed to write all the data in the game on the blockchain so that the transaction can be performed excessively as much as the commercial service on the blockchain. It is not necessary for ordinary blockchain DApp to list all Transactions on the chain. However, this test needs to overestimate the number of these transactions in securing test results that are expected to be huge services through limited users. Accordingly, all transactions are designed to be described on the chain.

Second, games developed to create a test environment were distributed and installed on cloud servers in six global regions. The test was also performed for about 15 days.

Third, based on the number of Transactions collected through tests and Transaction Per Second (TPS), improved performance and scalability were verified through comparison with the existing blockchain platform or DApp's Transaction Issue and TPS.

In addition, based on this, this study aimed to measure chain performance in a test environment similar to a commercial environment that could not be measured with the existing methodology. The blockchain records all the history of Transaction in the distributed ledger. In the case of a general public blockchain, the distributed ledger is open to all, and through this, the user can trust the transaction history recorded in the ledger without a third party or a trust agency that guarantees the history. Based on this technical understanding, distributed applications (DApps) have emerged, and the computational history of these DApps is also disclosed to everyone through the portal site. In general, in the blockchain industry, such portal sites are called Block Explorer. Block Explorer lets users know the content and history of Transaction, the number, and success/failure. Accordingly, this paper selected one type of blockchain platform to verify performance by implementing the game, and developed one type of block explorer that can view diploma data and maximum TPS, Transaction, and Block history. In addition, the goal is to secure data for use equivalent to the actual environment through the overuse of transaction records recorded on the distributed ledger of the blockchain, so all data generated in the game is designed to be recorded in the distributed ledger.

 

Neutrosophic statistics is the extension of classical statistics and is applied when the data is coming from a complex process or from an uncertain environment. The current study can be extended using neutrosophic statistics as future research. The statement that the proposed study can be extended for neutrosophic statistics can be added by citing some papers on neutrosophic statistics.

 

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation. Added Neutrosophic statistics paper.

51. Marcel-Ioan Bolos, Ioana-Alexandra Bradea and Camelia Delcea, "Modeling the Performance Indicators of Financial Assets with Neutrosophic Fuzzy Numbers", Symmetry 2019, 11(8).

 

52. Muhammad Aslam and Mohammed Albassam,"Inspection Plan Based on the Process Capability Index Using the Neutrosophic Statistical Method", Mathematics 2019, 7(7).

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The article is poorly written and and need proper proofread. Few of my feedback can be considered to improve the quality of the paper.

1. Introduction may be improved, adding the highlights and the problem statements.
2. Provide the experimental setup and the tools used for the study.
3. If possible provide a simulation parameters table.
4. You could improve writing, link better the ideas flow in the Introduction.
5. Review references because some of them are unstandardized.
6. The conclusion needs improvements towards major claimed contributio
7. Write some future directions in the conclusion section.
8. The difference between your proposal and related works is not clear, you could to details better. I suggest add a comparative table in ''Related Literature'' to contrast your solution in front of related works.
9. You could discuss the relationship between your solution and past literature. You can cite few papers with applications of blockchain: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ett.4329 , https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3467019 ,

Author Response

Author's Reply to the Review Report (Reviewer 3)

 

Open Review

(x) I would not like to sign my review report

( ) I would like to sign my review report

English language and style

( ) Extensive editing of English language and style required

(x) Moderate English changes required

( ) English language and style are fine/minor spell check required

( ) I don't feel qualified to judge about the English language and style

Yes      Can be improved    Must be improved  Not applicable

Does the introduction provide sufficient background and include all relevant references?

( )        (x)       ( )        ( )

Are all the cited references relevant to the research?

( )        (x)       ( )        ( )

Is the research design appropriate?

( )        (x)       ( )        ( )

Are the methods adequately described?

( )        (x)       ( )        ( )

Are the results clearly presented?

( )        (x)       ( )        ( )

Are the conclusions supported by the results?

( )        (x)       ( )        ( )

 

----------------------------

 

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article is poorly written and and need proper proofread. Few of my feedback can be considered to improve the quality of the paper.

 

1. Introduction may be improved, adding the highlights and the problem statements.

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation.

 

1. Introduction

In addition, blockchain services for certificates are already being applied in several places and PoC and pilot projects are being conducted. However, we are using blockchain and artificial intelligence algorithms to verify certificates for an artificial intelligence-based blockchain certificate system for accurate verification.

 

2. Provide the experimental setup and the tools used for the study.

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation.

Table 1: Experimental Condition for Performance Evaluation

Infomation	Spec	Core
Bandwidth	5TB	TeraByte
Geekbench 5.0 for LINUX	5.324	Version
Hardware	Depends on user enviroment	S/W
Software	HTML5	Chrome

Table 1 was experimented with software and hardware such as Bandwidth and Geekbench 5.0 for LINUX.

 

3. If possible provide a simulation parameters table.

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation.

 

5.4 Comparison with previous studies

Table 2 compares the performance between VISA and the existing blockchain platform and expresses it as a percentage. Based on this, it can be seen that the maxi-mum acceptance TPS of the Ethereum platform used by the majority of DApps is about 30 TPS, which shows 0.125% performance compared to the most representative VISA among financial services, and only 15% performance compared to PayPal. Considering that PayPal is a single fintech service, the performance of Ethereum, a driving platform for various DApps, will be further evaluated. On the other hand, the maximum TPS of DApp, the system presented in this study, was 4,000. It was verified that the platform under evaluation showed at least 50 times more performance than the maximum TPS of Ethereum's entire chain based on the maximum TPS of a single DApp in a commer-cial service environment.

 

 

Table 2: Comparison with previous studies

Blockchain Project  Name	Year of  release	Maximum TPS(Internal test)	Performance versus VISA
Bitcoin	2009	10	0.0417%
Ethereum	2015	30	0.125%
Eos	2018	3,000	12.5%
Our blockchain	2022	4,000	17.8%

 

4. You could improve writing, link better the ideas flow in the Introduction.

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation.

 

1. Introduction

In addition, blockchain services for certificates are already being applied in several places and PoC and pilot projects are being conducted. However, we are using blockchain and artificial intelligence algorithms to verify certificates for an artificial intelligence-based blockchain certificate system for accurate verification.

5. Review references because some of them are unstandardized.

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation. Reference standard updates required.

 

6. The conclusion needs improvements towards major claimed contribution.

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation.

7. Conclusion and Future Work

Also Performance between VISA and the existing blockchain platform and expresses it as a percentage. Based on this, it can be seen that the maximum acceptance TPS of the Ethereum platform used by the majority of DApps is about 30 TPS, which shows 0.125% performance compared to the most representative VISA among financial services, and only 15% performance compared to PayPal. Considering that PayPal is a single fintech service, the performance of Ethereum, a driving platform for various DApps, will be further evaluated. On the other hand, the maximum TPS of DApp, the system pre-sented in this study, was 4,000. It was verified that the platform under evaluation showed at least 50 times more performance than the maximum TPS of Ethereum's en-tire chain based on the maximum TPS of a single DApp in a commercial service envi-ronment.

7. Write some future directions in the conclusion section.

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation.

 

Also In addition, the limitations of the study were that this study proposed and developed a meaningful tool model to verify the scalability and performance of the blockchain platform, but also had the following limitations. It cannot be said that the maximum TPS is absolutely higher than the amount of activity in general IT commer-cial services. Therefore, there is a limitation in concluding that both the performance and scalability of the general IT commercial service level of the platform to be verified based on the data from this study. However, considering that a large amount of usage has been collected compared to the existing DApp, it can be supplemented by con-ducting tests on more users in the future. Second, the results of this study were vali-dated only in a virtual environment. Usually, services using blockchain platforms gen-erally use Bitcoin's finance as it covers various services such as logistics, medical care, and the environment in Lohae, it is necessary to verify them through development and testing in other environments in the future.

 

8. The difference between your proposal and related works is not clear, you could to details better. I suggest add a comparative table in ''Related Literature'' to contrast your solution in front of related works.

 

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation.

 

Table 1: Consensus Algorithm chain block of comparison.

Algorithm	Contents	Speed
PoW	Bitcoin	Slow
PoS	ADA	Medium
DPoS	EOS	Past
PBFT	HyperLedger	Past

 

Table1 will also compare the consensus algorithm of the blockchain. In addition, the consensus algorithms such as PoW, PoS, DPoS, and PBFT were compared and studied.

 

9. You could discuss the relationship between your solution and past literature. You can cite few papers with applications of blockchain: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ett.4329 , https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3467019 ,

 

Reply->

Thank you for your valuable comments. I revised the paper as per your recommendation.

 

Reference

 

53. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ett.4329 ,

54. https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3467019,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper can be accepted 

Reviewer 3 Report

Authors updated the paper as per my previous comments and no further update requires from my side. Pls check 53, 54 citations format. You directly added DOI.