Authors:
(1) Johannes Rude Jensen, University of Copenhagen, eToroX Labs (johannesrudejensen@gmail.com);
(2) Victor von Wachter, University of Copenhagen (victor.vonwachter@di.ku.dk);
(3) Omri Ross, University of Copenhagen, eToroX Labs (omri@di.ku.dk). Table of Links Abstract and Introduction 1 Literature Review 2 Methodology and Artefact Requirements 3 The Implementation and Integration of the Artefact 4 Artefact Evaluation 5 Discussion 6 Conclusion and Future Work, and References 2 Methodology and Artefact Requirements The iteration of the artefact presented in this paper is the result of a 6-month development process involving key stakeholders from a hosting organization. The hosting organization is a major international online brokerage with a long-term strategic interest in blockchain technology. Working with the participating stakeholders, we selected the design science research (DSR) methodology (Gregor and Hevner 2013) guiding a “build-demonstrate-evaluate” workflow in which multiple cyclical iterations of the artefact were built, tested and evaluated (Fridgen, Urbach and Schweizer, 2017). We defined a six step process, denoting a feedback loop between development and evaluation of core components of the artefact. The requirements for the present iteration of the artefact were gathered through multiple unstructured qualitative interviews with the stakeholders throughout the cyclical development process (Myers and Newman 2007). The authors of this paper played an integral role in the design and development of the artefact, working with the team of stakeholders in various roles (Table 1.). Through multiple iterations of the cyclical workflow, we defined a set of three tentative requirements, applied to the iteration of artefact presented in this paper (Table 2). This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY 4.0 DEED license. Authors: (1) Johannes Rude Jensen, University of Copenhagen, eToroX Labs (johannesrudejensen@gmail.com); (2) Victor von Wachter, University of Copenhagen (victor.vonwachter@di.ku.dk); (3) Omri Ross, University of Copenhagen, eToroX Labs (omri@di.ku.dk). Authors: Authors: (1) Johannes Rude Jensen, University of Copenhagen, eToroX Labs (johannesrudejensen@gmail.com); (2) Victor von Wachter, University of Copenhagen (victor.vonwachter@di.ku.dk); (3) Omri Ross, University of Copenhagen, eToroX Labs (omri@di.ku.dk). Table of Links Abstract and Introduction Abstract and Introduction 1 Literature Review 1 Literature Review 2 Methodology and Artefact Requirements 2 Methodology and Artefact Requirements 3 The Implementation and Integration of the Artefact 3 The Implementation and Integration of the Artefact 4 Artefact Evaluation 4 Artefact Evaluation 5 Discussion 5 Discussion 6 Conclusion and Future Work, and References 6 Conclusion and Future Work, and References 2 Methodology and Artefact Requirements The iteration of the artefact presented in this paper is the result of a 6-month development process involving key stakeholders from a hosting organization. The hosting organization is a major international online brokerage with a long-term strategic interest in blockchain technology. Working with the participating stakeholders, we selected the design science research (DSR) methodology (Gregor and Hevner 2013) guiding a “build-demonstrate-evaluate” workflow in which multiple cyclical iterations of the artefact were built, tested and evaluated (Fridgen, Urbach and Schweizer, 2017). We defined a six step process, denoting a feedback loop between development and evaluation of core components of the artefact. The requirements for the present iteration of the artefact were gathered through multiple unstructured qualitative interviews with the stakeholders throughout the cyclical development process (Myers and Newman 2007). The authors of this paper played an integral role in the design and development of the artefact, working with the team of stakeholders in various roles (Table 1.). Through multiple iterations of the cyclical workflow, we defined a set of three tentative requirements, applied to the iteration of artefact presented in this paper (Table 2). This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY 4.0 DEED license. This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY 4.0 DEED license. available on arxiv

Part of HackerNoon's growing list of open-source research papers, promoting free access to academic material.

How Microservices Power Blockchain Integration 

Leveraged Trading on Blockchain Technology: Literature Review

Read My Stories

Too Long; Didn't Read

CTA: Download the FREE AI Productivity Shift report

Building Better Blockchain Artefacts

About Author

Comments

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN

Related Stories

Untitled Story

The Future of Leveraged Trading on Blockchain

Crypto APIs' Role within Blockchain as a Service (BaaS)

How Important is the API Economy for Blockchain Application Development?

What Roles Do API Methods Play On The Blockchain?

Zeeve Launches Elastic APIs for Tron Blockchain

The Future of Leveraged Trading on Blockchain

Crypto APIs' Role within Blockchain as a Service (BaaS)

How Important is the API Economy for Blockchain Application Development?

What Roles Do API Methods Play On The Blockchain?

Zeeve Launches Elastic APIs for Tron Blockchain

Light-Mode

Classic

Newspaper

Dark-Mode

Neon Noir

Minty

HN StartUps