MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Modeling of Churn Process in Bitcoin Network

2020· article· en· W3013097561 on OpenAlex
Saeideh G. Motlagh, Jelena Mišić, Vojislav B. Mišić

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue2020 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChurningComputer scienceSynchronization (alternating current)Process (computing)Markov processSleep (system call)Markov chainBlock (permutation group theory)Computer networkDistributed computingMathematicsMachine learningStatisticsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we present an analytical model for the churning process in Bitcoin network. We model the churning process for ordinary (non-gateway) nodes with homogeneous sleep time using Continuous Time Markov Chain. Within performance results, we present mean synchronization time needed when nodes come back from sleep and block distribution time in presence of churning nodes. Our results indicate that sleep times of the order of several hours require synchronization times in the order of a minute. Also, a large number of churning nodes can significantly affect the distribution power of the Bitcoin network.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.893
Threshold uncertainty score0.706

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it