LibraryConsensus2017Design paperCorpus record
Analysis of the Blockchain Protocol in Asynchronous Networks
Bitcoin in asynchronous networks. Rafael Pass, Lior Seeman and abhi shelat.
The paper analyses Nakamoto consensus when the delay bound is not a clean round, and states how confirmation has to grow with that delay.
A reading of the public paper. Not a copy, not a benchmark, and not a claim about any later network.
A confirmation number copied from a wallet is not this analysis. Ask what delay it assumes.
- Evidence
- Primary paper
- Re-measured
- No
- Assumptions
- 3
- Records linked
- 4
Code
Source, repository, and what is actually hosted
- ePrint 2016/454https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/454
- The source URL is not a GitHub repository. No code remote is invented.
- Full text is not mirrored. Public availability is not a licence to copy the file onto this site.
- Add to a reading list
01 Claim ledger
What the paper is allowed to say
Each row is a sentence already in the study. The status is the same on every row: a model claim, not a live measurement.
Claim 01 · Paper model
The defect
The backbone proofs that assume a synchronous round do not automatically survive a network where messages can be late.
Claim 02 · Paper model
The proposal
The paper analyses Nakamoto consensus when the delay bound is not a clean round, and states how confirmation has to grow with that delay.
Claim 03 · Paper model
Synchrony is a model, not a property of the internet.
Confirmation depth is the knob the proof turns.
Claim 04 · Paper model
The bound
This does not price bitcoin.
02 Three cuts
Observation, model, falsifier
A desk does not stop at the summary. Each claim is cut three ways, using only this study's own assumptions and checks. Nothing here is a new figure.
01 The defect
Observation
What the study says
The backbone proofs that assume a synchronous round do not automatically survive a network where messages can be late.
Falsifier
What would retire it
What network delay is assumed?
02 The proposal
Observation
What the study says
The paper analyses Nakamoto consensus when the delay bound is not a clean round, and states how confirmation has to grow with that delay.
Model
What has to hold
An implementation with a different delay has a different bound.
Falsifier
What would retire it
How does the confirmation depth depend on that delay?
03 Synchrony is a model, not a property of the internet.
Observation
What the study says
Confirmation depth is the knob the proof turns.
Model
What has to hold
An implementation with a different delay has a different bound.
Falsifier
What would retire it
How does the confirmation depth depend on that delay?
04 The bound
03 Sequence
One action, as an operating tape
- 01State the delay the proof allows.
- 02Show how many blocks sit outside the unsafe tail.
- 03Do not treat a six-block rule from one deployment as the theorem.
- 04How does the confirmation depth depend on that delay?
04 Load-bearing
The argument, and where a pitch drops it
What the paper is for
The cut
A confirmation number copied from a wallet is not this analysis. Ask what delay it assumes.
Why it carries weight
If this cut is skipped, the paper's name is being used without the mechanism that makes the name mean anything.
Where it is dropped
An implementation with a different delay has a different bound.
What happened after
The cut
Later backbone papers keep the same vocabulary: prefix, quality, growth, and the delay.
Why it carries weight
If this cut is skipped, the paper's name is being used without the mechanism that makes the name mean anything.
Where it is dropped
An implementation with a different delay has a different bound.
05 Register
What has to be true
Model · Not re-measured
This does not price bitcoin.
Stake and threshold · Not re-measured
It does not cover a stake chain.
Network · Not re-measured
An implementation with a different delay has a different bound.
06 Divergence
What happened after the paper
Later backbone papers keep the same vocabulary: prefix, quality, growth, and the delay.
A later client, parameter set, or reward formula is a different object. Cite this paper for the mechanism. Cite a primary release for the network. This desk has not re-run the proof.
07 Pre-mortem
What to check before you use the idea
- 0 of 3 marked on this browser. A mark is a reading note, not a pass, a rating, or a recommendation.
08 Anatomy
The paper, in the order a builder needs
The problem it names
The backbone proofs that assume a synchronous round do not automatically survive a network where messages can be late.
What the design proposes
- Synchrony is a model, not a property of the internet.
- Confirmation depth is the knob the proof turns.
- Honesty of hash power is still assumed.
How the mechanism is specified
- State the delay the proof allows.
- Show how many blocks sit outside the unsafe tail.
- Do not treat a six-block rule from one deployment as the theorem.
What this page does not treat as proven
- This does not price bitcoin.
- It does not cover a stake chain.
- An implementation with a different delay has a different bound.
Why the desk still reads it
A confirmation number copied from a wallet is not this analysis. Ask what delay it assumes.
09 Lexicon
Terms, opened into the record
- Asynchronous
- Here: the proof's timing model is weaker than lockstep rounds.
- Confirmation depth
- How many blocks you wait before treating a prefix as stable.
10 Repository
Every linked record on this page
Underlined words open a page that already exists: a concept, a protocol profile, a failure record, or another paper. If a word is not underlined, this desk does not have a record for it.
This is Blockchain Lab's reading of a public design paper. It is not the paper, not a copy of it, and not an offer of tokens, equity, custody or a partnership. Later network behaviour can diverge from the text. Nothing here is investment, legal or technical advice.
Research status: Design paper. Last reviewed: 1 October 2026. This is a reading of a public paper, not investment, legal or security advice.