A study on protocols of cross-chain data synchronization for permission blockchain
for construction management
Rui Zhao 1*, Liupengfei Wu 2, Zhe Chen 3, Maohong Tang 4, Weisheng Lu 5, and Fan Xue 6
This is the authors’ version of the paper:
Zhao, R., Wu, L., Chen, Z., Tang, M., Lu, W., & Xue, F. (2021). A study on protocols of
cross-chain data synchronization for permission blockchain for construction
management. Proceedings of the 26th International Symposium on Advancement of
Construction Management and Real Estate , Springer, 1090-1101.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5256-2_85
This file is shared for personal and academic use only, under the license CC BYNC-ND 4.0 (Non-Commercial, No Derivatives, and with an Attributed citation
when you use). The final published version of this paper can be found at:
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5256-2_85. Any uses other than personal and academic
purposes must obtain appropriate permissions from Springer first.

5

10

Abstract: The construction industry is encountering management issues, such as low efficiency,
inadequate regulation and enforcement, absence of good coordination and knowledge sharing,
and ineffective billing practices. Blockchain is also gaining momentum as a part of the digital
transformation in the construction area and response to various challenges. Since various
blockchain implementations have different specifications for distributed ledger functionality
(e.g., high throughput, scalability), blockchains currently function as independent knowledge
islands that cannot access external data or conduct transactions on their own. Such information
silos must be bridged to create more stable blockchain applications. This research investigates
data synchronization protocols for cross-chain technologies in construction blockchain. It screens
the most suitable blockchain frameworks for use in the construction industry to establish a
consistent approach to support their application in construction blockchain. Finally, a cross-chain
data interaction protocol for blockchain-based supply chain and IFC chain construction is
proposed.

1* Rui Zhao: Corresponding author, Department of Real Estate and Construction, The University of Hong Kong, China
E-mail: jeremyrui.zhao@connect.hku.hk
2 Liupengfei Wu: Department of Real Estate and Construction, The University of Hong Kong, China
3 Zhe Chen: Department of Real Estate and Construction, The University of Hong Kong, China
4 Maohong Tang: Department of Real Estate and Construction, The University of Hong Kong, China
5 Weisheng Lu: Department of Real Estate and Construction, The University of Hong Kong, China
6 Fan Xue: Department of Real Estate and Construction, The University of Hong Kong, China

Keywords: Blockchain technology, Cross-chain, Construction blockchain.
15

1 Introduction

20

By 2022, global construction investment is expected to hit US$12.4 trillion [1]. Low efficiency is
currently cited as a significant cause of failure in the construction industry[2]. In contrast, it is
among the most critical sectors for future change. The McKinsey Global Institute estimates a
$1.6 trillion global productivity deficit that can be closed by enhancing business efficiency[3].
One of the biggest impediments to the building industry's modernization is its reluctance to
accept technical advances in contrast to the achievements seen in the logistics, automobile, and
mechanical engineering sectors [4]. The distributed ledger technology (DLT), also known as
"blockchain," is thought to have the ability to transform many global markets, including
construction.

25

30

35

40

45

Blockchain is a distributed database where the data or information is stored with unforgeable,
traceable, open and transparent, and collectively maintained. Blockchain is a booming
technology that plays a positive role in promoting data sharing, optimizing business processes,
reducing operational costs, enhancing collaborative efficiency, and building a trustworthy system
that cannot be underestimated. [5]. The core hypothesis of blockchain is establishing a digital
distributed consensus, ensuring that data is distributed decentralized across multiple nodes with
equal knowledge. No single actor has complete network authority, which increases clarity of
operation and improves data protection. Blockchain fundamentally reorganizes current process
paths in every enterprise where it is applied, carrying many benefits such as mutual learning,
instantaneous data sharing, automatic contract execution, network stability, and increased
teamwork by putting a focus on trust and cooperation amongst members [1].
Updating and sharing the Building Information Model (BIM) data is one of the most well-known
blockchain technology technologies in the construction industry. BIM is a process used in a
multi-dimensional digital model for stakeholders to visualize a construction project[6].
International Alliance for Interoperability (IAI) has introduced a protocol named Industry
Foundation Classes (IFC) to share consistent and precise building information between software
applications used during the lifecycle of a project or asset. IFC plays a vital role in improving
interoperability between software and shunning information loss. As a result, end-users can
better cooperate regardless of which applications they use. [7].
BIM model has rapidly become a common forum for all parties to collaborate on a single and
collaborative model in the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry. The
BIM maturity level can be used to identify supply chain management problems in BIM [8]. Due
to a large amount of variability between the modified design of the BIM model and the supply

50

55

60

chain., there is a need to form two separate blockchain networks for the BIM model and the
supply chain model to interact with data about the parts of the BIM model. The intelligent
contract structure keeps the data in all chains current in real-time, checking and content and part
functionality within the model from the design process to the execution phase. A cross-chain
protocol is needed to solve the confidence function between various blockchains and realize
knowledge transmission between blockchains.
The paper is organized as follows: the next section gives an outlook on the prospect of
blockchain technology in the construction industry, introduces the IFC file-based BIM model,
and describes the application of blockchain and BIM in the supply chain, followed by a
comparison to select the most suitable blockchain framework for the construction industry. Then,
the following section describes the whole process of data interaction in the two chains, the IFC
chain, and logistics blockchain. The final section concludes and discusses future research needs.

2 Blockchain in construction
2.1 BIM on chain

65

70

75

80

It is essential to provide compatible resources and assets within the construction industry project,
where many companies work intensively on ad hoc variations of specific projects. Widespread
and proven frameworks, ideally based on open standards, are essential for the project members to
communicate and cooperate without having any special proprietary software. BIM software's
advanced technologies enable a shift in the construction industry's use of information
technology, going from a static visual representation of a building to an interactive semantic
product and process model [7]. Information sharing can be the starting point for using BIM in the
phase of design, construction, and operation. Information sharing necessitates creating a
computing system in which users will effectively share data independent of software or data
place.
IFC can close the divide between stakeholders and project stages in the construction industry's
fractured project world. IFC-supported model-based architecture can alter the foundations of the
construction process. The potential for productivity gains is enormous: transparent
interoperability of building information models would allow for a continuous flow of design,
expense, project, manufacturing, and maintenance data, minimizing complexity and increasing
reliability during a building's life cycle [9]. As a result, the IFC initiative is one of the most
aggressive IT standardization initiatives in any sector.
The hierarchical structure of the IFC data model is divided into four layers: resource layer, the
core layer, interop layer, and domain layer. As shown in Figure 1, the resource layer contains the

85

most basic information. Entities within the same structure at each layer can be referenced to each
other. They can also be cited by entities of the upper level instead of referenced by entities at the
lower level. That is, the quotation of entities must follow the principle of top-down or same-level
reference. Based on this principle, the upper layer changes cannot directly interfere with the
information of the lower layer, which ensures the stability of the system architecture.

Figure 1. The layers of the IFC data model

90

95

Although data storage space and Internet speeds are becoming more affordable, information
efficiency and speed must be considered in blockchain BIM models. Due to the high redundancy
of IFC files and the characteristics of larger files, Xue and Lu [10] propose a semantic
differential transaction method that minimizes the information redundancy of BIM and
blockchain integration. Using this approach, one can store the original BIM model in the local
terminal and store the IFC altered part of the BIM model into the blockchain instead of the whole
IFC file. This approach reduces the redundancy of IFC files in the blockchain. Also, it takes full
advantage of the tamper-evident historical data and the traceability of transactions in blockchain
technology.
2.2 Supply chain management on chain

100

Each day, billions of goods are produced globally across diverse supply chains that span the
globe. Even though goods move through an extensive network of manufacturers, dealers,
transporters, warehousing facilities, and suppliers engaged in the design, processing, delivery,

105

110

115

120

and distribution of goods, these journeys are almost always invisible to us [11]. Supply chains are
getting more complicated, extensive, and multinational. End-to-end supply chain transparency
and accountability can aid in modeling product flow from raw materials to manufacturing,
testing, and finished goods, allowing for new types of organizational, risk, and sustainability
analysis. [12].
As a cutting-edge technology, blockchain could bring new changes to supply chain architecture,
organizational processes, and day-to-day management. The potential of blockchain to ensure the
reliability, traceability, and validity of information and trustless networks built on smart contracts
provide a technological reserve for supply chains and supply chain management [13]. In contrast
to traditional supply chains, there are four key players unique to blockchain networks that
perform critical functions in blockchain-based supply chain Registrars, providing unique
identifiers to the network participants. Standards bodies establish system standards for
blockchain development strategies and technical specifications, thus enabling the possibility of
fair trade. On the other hand, certificates provide certificates of authorization to a segment of the
population participating in blockchain-based networks. In addition, the licensed auditor is
responsible for auditing the stakeholders who are approved to participate in the network, such as
suppliers, distributors, and consumers [14]. The supply chain removes the need for a trustworthy
central organization to manage and administer the infrastructure by integrating with blockchain
technology, allowing consumers to examine an uninterrupted chain of ownership and purchases
from raw materials to final sales. When transactions occur through these various blockchain
knowledge dimensions, this information is documented in the ledger and is verifiable [15].
2.3 Comparison of existing blockchain systems

125

130

There are currently several blockchain systems available, such as Bitcoin [16], Ethereum,
Hyperledger-Fabric, and IOTA. Proof of work (POW), proof of stake (POS), practice byzantine
fault resistant (PBFT), and CITA (Tendermint) are examples of mainstream consensus
algorithms. We compare the functionality, stability, and applicability of popular blockchain
systems and consensus algorithms in construction scenarios. Li, Greenwood [17] analyzed the
difficulties and prospects of blockchain applications in the construction industry. They argue that
one of the challenges is that the BIM models are too large, and the transactions are too
concurrent. However, simultaneously, blockchain applications will enable the industry to
manage resources better and reduce costs, project schedules, and payment disputes. We
identified four conditions for a blockchain framework appropriate for the IoT scenario based on
previous studies and our Summary, including the ability to include heterogeneous networks,
consensus algorithms based on BFT, no transaction costs, and scalability.

135

140

145

150

155

First and foremost, blockchain technology can support a diverse network. When designing a
blockchain network for the construction industry, a heterogeneous network with several subnetworks to manage a range of business logic is needed.
Secondly, we assume that for construction blockchain scenarios, blockchain networks with
higher latency, greater scalability, and no transaction fees are more appropriate. Fast transaction
validation is a critical criterion for building blockchains, which necessitates blockchains reaching
consensus without forking. This condition can only be met by using the BFT-based consensus
algorithm. Furthermore, since mature construction blockchain networks must process a vast
number of transactions every day, transaction fees would place unacceptably high costs on
customers, which is well addressed by Hyperledger Fabric's zero transaction fee function.
The third requirement is that the blockchain framework is scalable. Higher performance and
scalability criteria are enforced on the infrastructure for a building blockchain, such as a large
number of participants, a large volume of transactions, a large volume of records, or a substantial
rise in the number of users, and a single-chain implementation would often face issues with
software architecture or hardware resources. According to the blockchain's framework
characteristics, attacking nodes on the blockchain will improve the system's fault tolerance and
the energy spent in credit endorsement of participants without enhancing efficiency.
A comparison of some significant blockchain networks is shown in Table 1. A thorough analysis
reveals that no one blockchain will satisfy the whole construction blockchain scenario
requirements. Therefore, a federated chain such as Fabric, which is different from the Bitcoin
mechanism and targeted for industry use, is better suited for architectural blockchain
environments.
Table 1. Comparison of blockchain systems[18]
Features

Bitcoin

Ethereum

Hyperledger-Fabric

CITA

Consensus

POW

POW, POS

PBFT

BFT

Consensus finality









Blockchain forks









Smart contracts operability









Fee less









Scalable









TX throughput

8 TPS

9-10 TPS

Thousands of TPS

8-11

TPS

3 Cross-chain for blockchain-based supply chain and BIM chain
160

165

170

175

180

3.1 Cross-chain technology for the construction industry
Blockchain is a comparatively closed framework as compared to conventional database-based
data storage. At the moment, the majority of blockchain-based protection implementation
scenarios use separate blockchain networks that are separated from one another and challenging
to interconnect and horizontally expand, impeding the efficient transmission and circulation of
digital assets across systems. With the success of blockchain implementations and their features'
sophistication, further cross-chain standards are being proposed [19]. Remote verification and
cross-chain authentication data interoperability are essential in the building field due to the
generally broad number of players participating in the same project where the authentication
standards span different security domains in heterogeneous blockchain networks [10]. However,
there are very few cross-chain technology multi-domain authentication solutions.
Notary systems, side chains/relays, and hash locking are the three processes that make up crosschain technology. Various cross-chain solutions are appropriate for multiple implementation
situations. The side chain and relay chain are the preferred cross-chain technologies for multidomain authentication in the construction industry [20]. Lightweight client-side authentication is
possible with this technology. It assesses the validity of a given authentication case and state in
the cross-chain scheme using smart contracts to verify the validity of a cryptographic hash tree.
The open web blockchain network is distributed, and its access protection is critical in the
construction industry. Conventional authentication of access is focused on PKI in a centralized
scheme[21]. The majority of the current multi-domain authentication is for large-scale networks of
the same kind and rarely includes domain authentication of heterogeneous systems. Existing
inter-domain authentication schemes challenge satisfactory authentication results, particularly for

185

blockchain users on various blockchain platforms. Therefore, we develop the PBFT process
based on cross-chain technologies and provide a multi-domain data system synchronization
protocol suitable for blockchain construction to tackle security issues in building blockchain
authentication [22].
3.2 Authentication scenario

190

195

200

205

210

The construction blockchain's endpoints are separated into several domains in this case, with
each domain named after its stored contents. The BIM model domain's blockchain, responsible
for storing the IFC information in the BIM model, is called the IFC chain. It holds the domain's
local authentication information and a federated blockchain called SC chain, which contains each
domain's local authentication data metadata. If cross-domain authentication is required, the
authenticator may read the federated chain's metadata to verify the access rights of the
authenticated endpoint.
The scenario of the interaction between the IFC chain and the blockchain chain for supply chain
(SC chain) of the BIM model of interest in this paper is shown in Figure 2. The upper part is the
IFC chain responsible for maintaining the local authentication blockchain, which has multiple
endpoints in the domain corresponding to BIM clients, customers, architects, building structure
designers, building service designers, and other professionals. The below part is the SC chain,
which exists as a federated chain, where all relevant stakeholders in the supply chain system can
implement and view the BIM models on the chain.
Overall, cross-chain transactions require the completion of four steps: authentication, consensus,
packaging, and block storage. The local blockchain first authenticates the identity of the
requester if cross-domain interaction is needed. Following verification, information for local
authentication is shared via cross-chain technology to the federated chain. The requesting node's
authentication is completed on the public authentication blockchain using the PBFT-based
authentication policy and the distributed authentication algorithm. After the authentication is
transmitted, cross-chain technologies collect and exchange authentication information into the
local chains of the other domain to obtain authentication certificates; for more information on the
authentication method, see below.

Figure 2. The possible authentication scenario
3.3 Cross-chain data exchange

215

220

225

The side-chain of cross-chain technologies is used to migrate data between the local and
federated chains. A side-chain is a protocol that enables tokens to switch properties between
blockchains securely. Thanks to two-way pegging technologies, the main chain's infrastructure
can be operated to some extent after the connection. Digital objects can be securely moved from
the first blockchain to the second blockchain using side-chain technology and then safely
restored from the second blockchain to the first blockchain at a later period [23]. The first
blockchain is known as the main chain, and the second blockchain is known as the side chain.
From the single chain of the main chain, the side chain can virtually enhance the main chain's
performance horizontally and vertically. Through the side chains, the main chain looks like it
supports these functions as well. By virtualization, it means that although there are horizontal
and vertical enhancements, the main chain itself does not have any changes. Still, only the many
side chains help it play a proxy-like role to make it look like the performance is improved [24].

230

235

Via two-way anchoring technology, the side-chain implementation understands cooperation and
data exchange between the master and slave chains. When a master chain asset is secured, the
side-chain asset that corresponds to it may be opened. When the side chain's assets are closed,
the master chain's equivalent assets are opened. The most significant challenge in introducing bidirectional anchoring is that the protocol change must be consistent with the current main chain,
i.e., it must not interfere with the main chain's functionality. The specific implementation
methods are the single hosting model, federation model, SPV model, drive chain model, and
hybrid model[25].
1)Single Hosting Mode: when the main chain's side chain is synchronized, a trustee is
appointed to perform information locking, asset synchronization, and unlocking tasks.
2) Federation Model: the other name is the notary model, in which multiple signatures from
multiple notaries sign off on transactions that transfer assets, avoiding centralization.

240

3)SPV Mode: By sending a transaction to a particular address on this chain, an SPV certificate
is automatically created to the side-chain, and a transaction is initiated to unlock the corresponding
asset on the side-chain
4)Drive Chain Model: The Drive Chain model uses miners as the custodian of funds and
issues custody of assets to digital asset miners, who vote on when to unlock the assets and where
to send them.

245

5)Hybrid Model: The hybrid model is an effective combination of these side-chain
mechanisms, using the most suitable model for chains with different structures, such as SPV for
the main chain and drive chain for the side chains.
3.4 Data structure

250

255

A block is a storage system for storing ledger data. The unforgeable cross-domain certification
certificates in the block can be checked publicly after encryption with public and private keys.
The block data structure defines the authentication certificates' description specification, security
policies, and security level in the cross-chain authentication information sharing: the header and
data parts of the cross-domain authentication block [26]. Four terms make up the header: (1) the
previous block's data and the parent block's hash index; (2) a timestamp to record the transaction
time; (3) Nonce (random number, counter for workload proof algorithm); and (4) Merkle tree
root data that summarizes and quickly summarizes all the transaction data in the checksum
block. Figure 3 illustrates the structure of the data. A Merkle tree is essentially a tree-like data
structure consisting of data blocks, leaf nodes, intermediate nodes, and root nodes. The hashing

260

265

operation used to generate the Merkle tree is a standard cryptographic function in the blockchain.
Data of arbitrary size and length are hashed to obtain a fixed size and length value, i.e., the hash
value. The certificate content includes the certificate version number, serial number, certificate
signature algorithm, message-digest algorithm, and other generation information. The validation
information for cross-domain authentication is stored in the Merkle tree of the blockchain by
nodes in the alliance chain [27].

Figure 3. The structure of the certified blockchain

3.5 Certification process
Figure 4 depicts the cross-domain authentication method, which involves registration,
authentication order, token transfer, distributed authentication, and authentication passing.
3.5.1 Register

270

275

In the registration phase, terminal A in the IFC chain initiates registration based on a unique ID
and triggers the digital signature and encryption mechanism on the local chain. The system
generates and returns the public key encrypted registration information
Sign(UUID||timestamp||n1) of the terminal through the certificate of the terminal, where n1 is a
random number selected by the system. Through the above operation, the IFC file completes the
registration process.
3.5.2 Authentication

280

285

290

295

When the terminal on the IFC chain needs to access the resources on the SC chain, the terminal
initiates the authentication request Request(IDIFC||PubIFC||timestampǁbusinuss_code), which
includes the IFC file ID where the transition happened, the transaction's public key, and the
company form. Following validation by the local chain, it establishes a two-way link with the
authentication SC chain. It synchronously transmits the IFC chain's authentication request
information and the certificate information to the relay chain, resulting in the relay chain having
both the IFC chain's authentication certificate and the cross-domain authentication request of this
terminal.
3.5.3 Verification

The relay chain's smart contract will conduct distributed authentication of the nodes applying for
entry. The authentication group is formed by selecting nodes from the relay chain that satisfy the
threshold number. For distributed authentication, the PBFT consensus algorithm is used. Finally,
the relay chain stores the authentication data. The authentication result is stored in the relay
chain's distributed ledger after a smart contract is triggered, after which the relay chain will
transfer the authentication credential information to the SC chain's blockchain through a twoway hook, allowing the SC chain's nodes to authenticate the terminals on the IFC chain.
Finally, the IFC chain node verified by the SC chain terminal will obtain the timestamp of the
IFC file on the SC chain and use the smart contract to compare it with the timestamp when the
transaction was submitted. If the timestamp on the SC chain shows a time later than when the
IFC chain introduced the transaction, it proves that a change in the IFC file on the Sc chain that
was not requested by the IFC chain occurred after the transaction was submitted. Then the

transaction is considered to be risky, and it is recommended to proceed later, although the
probability of this happening in the construction field is small.
300

305

3.5.4 Connection creation

After the IFC chain's terminal sends a remote access request to the SC chain's terminal, the SC
chain's terminal authenticates the request before invoking the SC chain's smart contract to check
the access request. Since the terminal on the IFC chain has contact authority on the SC chain, the
terminal on the SC chain will quickly validate the identity and authority of the terminal on the
IFC chain, and safe communication can be developed after authentication, thanks to the
distributed consensus of the blockchain and the security property of unforgeability.

Figure 4. Access authentication process

4 Summary
310

This paper focuses on the cross-chain technology research of blockchain in the construction
field. In the construction field, the vast BIM will bring tremendous network transmission
pressure. The data cannot be processed in parallel, bringing more significant trouble for the

315

320

325

stakeholders involved in the construction process. To solve the problem, we analyzed a variety of
blockchain models with broader circulation. We compare and filter out the most timely coalition
chain used in the construction field, propose the collapse strategy using two-way anchoring, and
finally propose an improved network communication protocol. This study can lay the initial
foundation for cross-chain research in the construction field and pave the way for the subsequent
technical improvement of cross-chain protocols for blockchains specifically used in the
construction field.
Future works are suggested in the following directions. First, a docker cluster is built using
Kubernetes to join a large amount of actual data for multiple batches of experiments and
compare with various cross-chain technologies popular nowadays. Second, a blockchain model
based on this cross-chain protocol and combined with a distributed machine learning paradigm
called federation learning is used to build efficient machine learning models among multiple
participants or multiple computational nodes to solve the pervasive information silo problem.

Acknowledgments

330

The work presented in this paper was financially supported by the Hong Kong Research Grants
Committee (RGC) with the General Research Fund (GRF, 17200221) and the Hong Kong
Innovation and Technology Commission (ITC) with the Innovation and Technology Fund (ITF)
(No ITP/029/20LP).

References
[1]Nawari, N.O. and S. Ravindran, Blockchain technology and BIM process: review and potential
applications. ITcon, 2019. 24: p. 209-238.

335

[2]Hu, X. and C. Liu, Measuring efficiency, effectiveness and overall performance in the Chinese
construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 2018.
[3]Barbosa, F., Reinventing construction–A route to higher productivity. February 2017. 2017.
[4]Oesterreich, T.D. and F. Teuteberg, Understanding the implications of digitisation and
automation in the context of Industry 4.0: A triangulation approach and elements of a
research agenda for the construction industry. Computers in industry, 2016. 83: p. 121-139.

340

[5]Crosby, M., et al., Blockchain technology: Beyond bitcoin. Applied Innovation, 2016. 2(6-10):
p. 71.

[6]Fountain, J. and S. Langar, Building Information Modeling (BIM) outsourcing among general
contractors. Automation in construction, 2018. 95: p. 107-117.

345

[7]Vanlande, R., C. Nicolle, and C. Cruz, IFC and building lifecycle management. Automation in
construction, 2008. 18(1): p. 70-78.

350

[8]Fitriawijaya, A. and T. Hsin-Hsuan, A blockchain approach to supply chain management in a
BIM-enabled environment, in Intelligent and Informed - Proceedings of the 24th International
Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia, CAADRIA 2019.
2019, The Association for Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia
(CAADRIA). p. 411-420.
[9]Laakso, M. and A. Kiviniemi, A review of IFC standardization–interoperability through
complementary development approaches. 2011.

355

[10]Xue, F. and W. Lu, A semantic differential transaction approach to minimizing information
redundancy for BIM and blockchain integration. Automation in Construction, 2020. 118: p.
103270.
[11]Abeyratne, S.A. and R.P. Monfared, Blockchain ready manufacturing supply chain using
distributed ledger. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, 2016.
5(9): p. 1-10.

360

[12]Min, H., Blockchain technology for enhancing supply chain resilience. Business Horizons,
2019. 62(1): p. 35-45.
[13]Saberi, S., et al., Blockchain technology and its relationships to sustainable supply chain
management. International Journal of Production Research, 2019. 57(7): p. 2117-2135.
[14]Steiner, J. and J. Baker. Blockchain: The Solution for Transparency in Product Supply Chains.
2015; Available from: https://www.provenance.org/whitepaper.

365

[15]Pazaitis, A., P. De Filippi, and V. Kostakis, Blockchain and value systems in the sharing
economy: The illustrative case of Backfeed. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,
2017. 125: p. 105-115.
[16]Nakamoto, S., Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. 2019, Manubot.

370

[17]Li, J., D. Greenwood, and M. Kassem, Blockchain in the built environment and construction
industry: A systematic review, conceptual models and practical use cases. Automation in
Construction, 2019. 102: p. 288-307.

[18]Makhdoom, I., M. Abolhasan, and W. Ni. Blockchain for IoT: The challenges and a way
forward. in ICETE 2018-Proceedings of the 15th International Joint Conference on eBusiness and Telecommunications. 2018.
375

[19]Moinet, A., B. Darties, and J.-L. Baril, Blockchain based trust & authentication for
decentralized sensor networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.01730, 2017.
[20]Li, X., et al., Two-layer Adaptive Blockchain-based Supervision model for off-site modular
housing production. Computers in Industry, 2021. 128: p. 103437.

380

[21]Millán, G.L., et al., PKI-based trust management in inter-domain scenarios. Computers &
Security, 2010. 29(2): p. 278-290.
[22]Wu, L., W. Lu, and F. Xue. Construction Inspection Information Management with
Consortium Blockchain. in Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium on Advancement
of Construction Management and Real Estate (CRIOCM2020). 2020. Springer.

385

[23]ElMessiry, M. and A. ElMessiry. Blockchain framework for textile supply chain management.
in International Conference on Blockchain. 2018. Springer.
[24]Wang, H., Y. Cen, and X. Li. Blockchain router: A cross-chain communication protocol. in
Proceedings of the 6th international conference on informatics, environment, energy and
applications. 2017.

390

[25]Li, D., et al., Research on Multidomain Authentication of IoT Based on Cross-Chain
Technology. Security and Communication Networks, 2020. 2020.
[26]Nofer, M., et al., Blockchain. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 2017. 59(3): p.
183-187.
[27]Li, C.Z., et al., A blockchain-and IoT-based smart product-service system for the sustainability
of prefabricated housing construction. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021. 286: p. 125391.

395