MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204280976 · doi:10.1145/3464298.3484503

Prosecutor

2021· article· en· W3204280976 on OpenAlex

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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsByzantine fault toleranceServerComputer scienceByzantine architectureReplication (statistics)Hash functionProtocol (science)Quantum Byzantine agreementComputer securityComputer networkAuthentication (law)Distributed computingFault tolerance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current leader-based Byzantine fault-tolerant (BFT) protocols aim to improve the efficiency for achieving consensus while tolerating failures; however, Byzantine servers are able to repeatedly impair BFT systems as faulty servers launch attacks without costs. In this paper, leveraging Proof-of-Work and Raft, we propose a new BFT consensus protocol called Prosecutor that dynamically penalizes suspected faulty behavior and suppresses Byzantine servers over time. Prosecutor obstructs Byzantine servers from being elected in leader election by imposing hash computation on new election campaigns. Furthermore, Prosecutor applies message authentication to achieve secure log replication and maintains a similar message-passing scheme as Raft. The evaluation results show that the penalization mechanism progressively suppresses and marginalizes Byzantine servers if they repeatedly launch malicious attacks.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed systems and fault toleranceFrench-language works237,207