運用區塊鏈與審查者品質管控機制提升學術論文評審之可信度與透明度

Abstract

學術論文審查制度是科學出版的基石，但長期以來飽受透明度不足、審查者 偏見、以及無法驗證審查者責任的質疑。傳統的同行評審系統多半運作不透明， 缺乏機制以評估或獎勵優質審查者，進而削弱了學術評鑑的公信力。本論文提出一套基於區塊鏈技術(採用 Hyperledger Fabric)之學術論文審查框架，整合「審查者品質控管機制」，以解決上述問題。 本系統透過智慧合約設計，實現論文提交、審查者授權、審查評分與評論再評價(meta-review)等核心流程。其中一項創新為建構「審查者資料檔案」，整合來自學術社群的評價，進而計算可驗證的「helpful ratio(幫助率)」。 智慧合約採用角色導向存取控制機制，確保只有被授權的審查者能進行評審。系統同時提供透明查詢功能，讓使用者可追溯論文審查過程、評分記錄與審查者歷史評價，所有紀錄皆具備區塊鏈的不可竄改性與加密簽章。 為驗證本系統效益，我們以Amazon美妝評論資料集進行分析，證實具身分可信度之評論者，其helpful ratio明顯優於未驗證者，支持「身分可信度提升內容可信度」的論點。系統亦可透過交易編號與時間戳完整追蹤每筆操作，提升整體工作流程的可審計性與信任度。 本研究結合區塊鏈技術與學術出版，將審查者品質控制機制嵌入共識流程中，為未來建立更具透明度、公平性與可驗證性的學術審查平台奠定基礎。

Academic peer review is a cornerstone of scientific publishing, yet it faces longstanding concerns over transparency, reviewer bias, and the inability to verify reviewer accountability. Traditional systems often rely on opaque processes and lack mechanisms to assess or reward reviewer performance, undermining trust in scholarly evaluation. This thesis presents a blockchain-based academic peer review framework built on Hyperledger Fabric, integrating reviewer quality control mechanisms to address these limitations. The proposed system introduces a smart contract architecture that governs paper submission, reviewer assignment, scoring, and meta-review. A novel feature of the system is the construction of a dynamic reviewer profile, which aggregates community feedback (in the form of helpfulness ratings) and calculates a verifiable ”helpful ratio” for each reviewer. The smart contract modules enforce role-based access control, ensuring only authorized reviewers can contribute. The system also supports transparent queries of reviewer histories, review ratings, and immutable on-chain record. Experimental validation using real-world Amazon review data demonstrates that reviewers with verified identities consistently receive higher helpfulness scores, supporting the thesis that identity-aware mechanisms can enhance review credibility. The implementation also ensures traceability of all actions via blockchain transaction IDs and timestamps, enabling auditability and trust across all stages of the peer review workflow. This work bridges the gap between decentralized technologies and academic publishing by embedding reviewer accountability directly into the consensus process. It provides a foundation for future peer review platforms that are not only decentralized, but also reviewer-aware, fair, and verifiable.