对本文的总体评价为:(1-5分,5分最高)
可参考以下标准:
有必要时,可以在文中任何地方插入你的签名。
A Survey of Distributed Consensus Protocols for Blockchain Network
2019
arXiv
Since the inception of Bitcoin, cryptocurrencies
and the underlying blockchain technology have attracted an
increasing interest from both academia and industry. Among
various core components, consensus protocol is the defining
technology behind the security and performance of blockchain.
From incremental modifications of Nakamoto consensus protocol
to innovative alternative consensus mechanisms, many consensus
protocols have been proposed to improve the performance of
the blockchain network itself or to accommodate other specific
application needs.
In this survey, we present a comprehensive review and anal-
ysis on the state-of-the-art blockchain consensus protocols. To
facilitate the discussion of our analysis, we first introduce the
key definitions and relevant results in the classic theory of fault
tolerance which helps to lay the foundation for further discussion.
We identify five core components in a blockchain, namely,
block proposal, block validation, information propagation, block
finalization, and incentive mechanism. Various blockchain con-
sensus protocols are then compared and analyzed using the five-
component analysis framework. These analyses provide us new
insights in the fundamental differences of various proposals in
terms of their suitable application scenarios (i.e. key assump-
tions), expected fault tolerance, scalability, and drawbacks.
We believe this survey will provide blockchain developers and researchers a comprehensive view on the state-of-the-art consensus protocols and facilitate the process of designing future protocols.
Xiao, Yang, Ning Zhang, Wenjing Lou, and Y. Thomas Hou. “A Survey of Distributed Consensus Protocols for Blockchain Networks.” arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.04098 (2019).
1. 论文是关于什么的?[请提供该论文的简要摘要。]
2. 这篇论文的长处和短处是什么?[请以以下角度评述:(a)创新(研究问题、建模、方法等);(b)相关性(研究问题、发现等);(c)严谨性(适当的方法、分析的正确性等)]
研究问题、建模、方法等
研究问题、发现
适当的方法、分析的正确性等
3.如果有的话,潜在改进的主要地方是什么?[如果这些关键要求和建议能够被适当处理,请重点关注能使文章发表的关键要求和建议。如果你看到不可逾越的障碍,请清楚地描述你的担忧。如果能为编辑和作者提供具体有建设性的意见最好不过了,并在可能的情况下,提出可行的建议。同样,应避免含糊不清和/或含糊不清的批评。]
4.如果有的话,潜在改进的微小地方是什么?[再次,请具体说明。]
5.有没有机会做一项新的研究?