SharDAG: Scaling DAG-Based Blockchains Via Adaptive Sharding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG)-based blockchain (a.k.a distributed ledger) has become prevalent for supporting highly concurrent applications. Its inherent parallel data structure accelerates block generation significantly, shifting the bottleneck from performance to storage scalability. An intuitive solution is to apply state sharding that divides the entire ledger (i.e., transactions and states) into multiple shards. While each node only stores proportional transactions, it suffers from the challenges of storing and ensuring the processing consistency of cross-shard transactions. In this paper, we propose SharDAG, a new mechanism that leverages adaptive sharding for DAG-based blockchains to achieve high performance and strong consistency. The key idea of SharDAG is to exploit unique characteristics - silent assets - and design a lightweight processing mechanism based on avatar account caching. Furthermore, we design a Byzantine resilient cross-shard verification mechanism with a theoretically optimal number of participating nodes, which guarantees the consistency and security of avatar account aggregation. Our comprehensive evaluations on real-world workloads demonstrate that SharDAG presents up to 3.8 x throughput improvement compared to the state-of-the-art and reduces the storage overhead of cross-shard transactions.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".