Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Smart contract vs. traditional contract.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Smart contracts example.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 1.

Centrality and dispersion statistics computed for all the Smart Contract software metrics.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Statements statistics computed for all the Smart Contracts.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Histogram distributions of the metrics Total lines, Blanks, Function and Payable.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Histogram distributions of the metrics Events, Mapping, Modifier and Contract.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Histogram distributions of the metrics Address, Cyclomatic, Comments, ABI, Bytecode and LOCS.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

The average number of interfaces and libraries in Smart Contract.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

The average number of LOC and Bytecodes per Smart Contract.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

Smart Contracts’ LOC distribution vs. pragma version.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Fig 9.

Power law and Log normal best fitting of the metrics Total lines, Blanks, Function and Payable.

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Fig 10.

Power law and Log normal best fitting of the metrics Events, Mapping, Modifier and Contract.

More »

Fig 10 Expand

Fig 11.

Power law and Log normal best fitting of the metrics Address, Cyclomatic, Comments, ABI, Bytecode and LOCS.

More »

Fig 11 Expand

Table 3.

Fitting parameters for the power law and log-normal distributions.

The xmin and α estimated parameters are reported for the Power Law. For the Log-Normal the xmin, log(μ) and log(σ) estimated parameters are reported.

More »

Table 3 Expand