Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Analyzing Geospatial Distribution in 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 2305.17771 v1 pith:YFFIBDZ6 submitted 2023-05-28 cs.DC cs.CY

classification cs.DCcs.CY
keywords validatorsblockchainsgeospatialtheyconsensusdistributiongeospatiallyminority
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Blockchains are decentralized; are they genuinely? We analyze blockchain decentralization's often-overlooked but quantifiable dimension: geospatial distribution of transaction processing. Blockchains bring with them the potential for geospatially distributed transaction processing. They enable validators from geospatially distant locations to partake in consensus protocols; we refer to them as minority validators. Based on our observations, in practice, most validators are often geographically concentrated in close proximity. Furthermore, we observed that minority validators tend not to meet the performance requirements, often misidentified as crash failures. Consequently, they are subject to punishment by jailing (removal from the validator set) and/or slashing (penalty in native tokens). Our emulations, under controlled conditions, demonstrate the same results, raising serious concerns about the potential for the geospatial centralization of validators. To address this, we developed a solution that easily integrates with consensus protocols, and we demonstrated its effectiveness.

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. Decentralization in PoS Blockchain Consensus: Quantification and Advancement

    cs.DC 2025-04 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Square-root and logarithmic stake-weighting functions raise decentralization metrics by about 51% and 132% respectively across ten PoS blockchains, but the claims depend on an unresolved Sybil-cost assumption.

Pith tools