Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Comparison of Decentralization in DPoS and PoW Blockchains

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2002.02082 v3 pith:R4KHTKHJ submitted 2020-02-06 cs.CR

classification cs.CR
keywords decentralizationsteembitcoinblockchainsdpospowerblockchainblocks
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Decentralization is a key indicator for the evaluation of public blockchains. In the past, there have been very few studies on measuring and comparing the actual level of decentralization between Proof-of-Work (PoW) blockchains and blockchains with other consensus protocols. This paper presents a new comparison study of the level of decentralization in Bitcoin and Steem, a prominent Delegated-Proof-of-Stake (DPoS) blockchain. Our study particularly focuses on analysing the power that decides the creators of blocks in the blockchain. In Bitcoin, miners with higher computational power generate more blocks. In contrast, blocks in Steem are equally generated by witnesses while witnesses are periodically elected by stakeholders with different voting power weighted by invested stake. We analyze the process of stake-weighted election of witnesses in DPoS and measure the actual stake invested by each stakeholder in Steem. We then compute the Shannon entropy of the distribution of computational power among miners in Bitcoin and the distribution of invested stake among stakeholders in Steem. Our analyses reveal that neither Bitcoin nor Steem is dominantly better than the other with respect to decentralization. Compared with Steem, Bitcoin tends to be more decentralized among top miners but less decentralized in general. Our study is designed to provide insights into the current state of the degree of decentralization in DPoS and PoW blockchains. We believe that the methodologies and findings in this paper can facilitate future studies of decentralization in other blockchain systems employing different consensus protocols.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A Full-History Network Dataset for BTC Asset Decentralization Profiling

    q-fin.ST 2024-11 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    The paper introduces a purported full-history Bitcoin transaction network dataset and proposes several decentralization metrics, but the dataset is not actually provided and the analysis has significant methodological gaps.

Pith tools