Design and Evaluation of a Heterogeneous Lightweight Blockchain-Based Marketplace

Abstract

The proposal of this paper is to introduce a low-level blockchain marketplace, which is a blockchain where participants could share its power generation and demand. To achieve this implementation in a secure way for each actor in the network, we proposed to deploy it over efficient and generic low-performance devices. Thus, they are installed as IoT devices, registering measurements each fifteen minutes, and also acting as blockchain nodes for the marketplace. Nevertheless, it is necessary that blockchain is lightweight, so it is implemented as a specific consensus protocol that allows each node to have enough time and computer requirements to act both as an IoT device and a blockchain node. This marketplace will be ruled by Smart Contracts deployed inside the blockchain. With them, it is possible to make registers for power generation and demand. This low-level marketplace could be connected to other services to execute matching algorithms from the data stored in the blockchain. Finally, a real test-bed implementation of the marketplace was tested, to confirm that it is technically feasible.

Blockchain-Enabled Cybersecurity Provision for Scalable Heterogeneous Network: A Comprehensive Survey

“…Generally, three types of blockchain network nodes, namely client node, node generator, and node validator, are very significant for the data transactions [271]. Client nodes are treated as virtual users who access a number of predefined data block transactions in the blockchain network through their specific network interface [272]. It includes a real-time authentication hash during block transactions to receive the original document.…”

“Lakshya” A Novel Virtual Laboratory based on Django framework to conduct experiments in the area of Machine Learning, Signal processing and Communication

“…J.A. Guerra et al in [1] briefed about the importance of Virtual Laboratory in the field of DSP. The paper addresses solution strategy for conducting DSP experiments remotely to students and professors using TMS320C6713 DSK and TMDX5505EZDSP boards.…”

“…Results of MFCC algorithm will be displayed with graph, as shown in fig. 6.The experiment displays original speech, its spectrogram and MFCC coefficients [1], [2], [3], [5], [10]. (3).…”

A Systematic Literature Review of Lightweight Blockchain for IoT

“…[86] NS-3 Consensus processing time, implementation cost (hardware implementation area), power consumption [87] N/A Storage cost [88] Python & NS-3 Storage cost, block propagation time, number of calculations [89] N/A Storage cost [90] Cooja Number of transactions mined, latency, consensus time, energy consumption [91] C The increment of the Flash and RAM memory occupation and the average network latency [92] Hyperledger Storage efficiency, computational cost, communication cost [93] Ethereum Computational complexity, communication overhead [94] N/A CPU usage, memory usage, transactions performance [95] Matlab Consensus algorithm complexity, consensus efficiency [96] N/A Transaction throughput, memory usage, CPU utilization, bandwidth consumption [97] N/A Resource utilization, consensus delay [98] Ethereum Blockchain size, CPU and memory overhead, storage latency, PKI latency [99] Ethereum Storage cost, computational cost [100] N/A Computational cost, communication overhead [101] Hyperledger Transactions per second, consensus delay, communication times [102] Hyperledger Transactions per second, scalability, storage cost, block weight N/A Transactions per second [103] Hyperledger Scalability, storage cost, transactions delay, processing time [104] N/A DAG consensus: cumulative weights, number of tips, simulation time [106] Python Transaction confirmation overhead, validation overhead [107] Matlab Operating capability under the symmetric and asymmetric information environments [108] Python Authentication delay, application delay, network usage and energy consumption [109] Ethereum Gas cost, response time [110] Python Storage overhead, consensus latency [111] Hyperledger Transfer speed, migration time [112] Ethereum Disk usage, memory allocation, CPU usage, throughput, power consumption [113] NS3 Cryptography computational cost [114] N/A Power consumption, CPU usage, block transmission cost, message transmission overhead [114] Java Computational cost, storage, communication overhead, consensus delay...…”