论文标题
DPO和POW区块链中的权力下放的比较
Comparison of Decentralization in DPoS and PoW Blockchains
论文作者
论文摘要
权力下放是评估公共区块链的关键指标。过去,很少有关于测量和比较工作证明(POW)区块链和区块链与其他共识方案之间的实际权力下放水平的研究。本文对比特币和斯蒂姆(Steem)的权力下放水平进行了一项新的比较研究,这是一个突出的授权销售(DPOS)区块链。我们的研究特别着重于分析决定区块链中区块的创建者的能力。在比特币中,具有较高计算功率的矿工会产生更多的区块。相比之下,Steem中的街区同样由证人产生,而证人则由投票权加权的利益相关者定期选举。我们分析了DPO中证人的权益加权选举的过程,并衡量Steem中每个利益相关者所投资的实际利益。然后,我们计算矿工在比特币中计算能力分布的香农熵以及Steem利益相关者之间投资股份的分配。我们的分析表明,在权力下放方面,比特币和Steem都没有比其他比特币更好。与Steem相比,比特币在顶级矿工中倾向于分散,但总体上不那么分散。我们的研究旨在洞悉DPO和POW区块链中权力下放程度的当前状态。我们认为,本文中的方法和发现可以促进采用不同共识协议的其他区块链系统中的权力下放研究。
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.