BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Andrew Lewis-Pye

Andrew Lewis-Pye contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster ComputingData Structures and AlgorithmsCryptography and Security

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
3topics
2close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2025arXiv

Morpheus Consensus: Excelling on trails and autobahns

Recent research in consensus has often focussed on protocols for State-Machine-Replication (SMR) that can handle high throughputs. Such state-of-the-art protocols (generally DAG-based) induce undue overhead when the needed throughput is low, or else exhibit unnecessarily-poor latency and communication complexity during periods of low throughput. Here we present Morpheus Consensus, which naturally morphs from a quiescent low-throughput leaderless blockchain protocol to a high-throughput leader-based DAG protocol and back, excelling in latency and complexity in both settings. During high-throughout, Morpheus pars with state-of-the-art DAG-based protocols, including Autobahn. During low-throughput, Morpheus exhibits competitive complexity and lower latency than standard protocols such as PBFT and Tendermint, which in turn do not perform well during high-throughput. The key idea of Morpheus is that as long as blocks do not conflict (due to Byzantine behaviour, network delays, or high-throughput simultaneous production) it produces a forkless blockchain, promptly finalizing each block upon arrival. It assigns a leader only if one is needed to resolve conflicts, in a manner and with performance not unlike Autobahn.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Quadratic worst-case message complexity for State Machine Replication in the partial synchrony model

We consider the message complexity of State Machine Replication protocols dealing with Byzantine failures in the partial synchrony model. A result of Dolev and Reischuk gives a quadratic lower bound for the message complexity, but it was unknown whether this lower bound is tight, with the most efficient known protocols giving worst-case message complexity $O(n^3)$. We describe a protocol which meets Dolev and Reischuk's quadratic lower bound, while also satisfying other desirable properties. To specify these properties, suppose that we have $n$ replicas, $f$ of which display Byzantine faults (with $n\geq 3f+1$). Suppose that $Δ$ is an upper bound on message delay, i.e. if a message is sent at time $t$, then it is received by time $ \text{max} \{ t, GST \} +Δ$. We describe a deterministic protocol that simultaneously achieves $O(n^2)$ worst-case message complexity, optimistic responsiveness, $O(fΔ)$ time to first confirmation after $GST$ and $O(n)$ mean message complexity.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

A General Framework for the Security Analysis of Blockchain Protocols

Blockchain protocols differ in fundamental ways, including the mechanics of selecting users to produce blocks (e.g., proof-of-work vs. proof-of-stake) and the method to establish consensus (e.g., longest chain rules vs. Byzantine fault-tolerant (BFT) inspired protocols). These fundamental differences have hindered "apples-to-apples" comparisons between different categories of blockchain protocols and, in turn, the development of theory to formally discuss their relative merits. This paper presents a parsimonious abstraction sufficient for capturing and comparing properties of many well-known permissionless blockchain protocols, simultaneously capturing essential properties of both proof-of-work (PoW) and proof-of-stake (PoS) protocols, and of both longest-chain-type and BFT-type protocols. Our framework blackboxes the precise mechanics of the user selection process, allowing us to isolate the properties of the selection process that are significant for protocol design. We demonstrate the utility of our general framework with several concrete results: 1. We prove a CAP-type impossibility theorem asserting that liveness with an unknown level of participation rules out security in a partially synchronous setting. 2. Delving deeper into the partially synchronous setting, we prove that a necessary and sufficient condition for security is the production of "certificates," meaning stand-alone proofs of block confirmation. 3. Restricting to synchronous settings, we prove that typical protocols with a known level of participation (including longest chain-type PoS protocols) can be adapted to provide certificates, but those with an unknown level of participation cannot. 4. Finally, we use our framework to articulate a modular two-step approach to blockchain security analysis that effectively reduces the permissionless case to the permissioned case.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Resource Pools and the CAP Theorem

Blockchain protocols differ in fundamental ways, including the mechanics of selecting users to produce blocks (e.g., proof-of-work vs. proof-of-stake) and the method to establish consensus (e.g., longest chain rules vs. BFT-inspired protocols). These fundamental differences have hindered "apples-to-apples" comparisons between different categories of blockchain protocols and, in turn, the development of theory to formally discuss their relative merits. This paper presents a parsimonious abstraction sufficient for capturing and comparing properties of many well-known permissionless blockchain protocols, simultaneously capturing essential properties of both proof-of-work and proof-of-stake protocols, and of both longest-chain-type and BFT-type protocols. Our framework blackboxes the precise mechanics of the user selection process, allowing us to isolate the properties of the selection process which are significant for protocol design. We illustrate our framework's utility with two results. First, we prove an analog of the CAP theorem from distributed computing for our framework in a partially synchronous setting. This theorem shows that a fundamental dichotomy holds between protocols (such as Bitcoin) that are adaptive, in the sense that they can function given unpredictable levels of participation, and protocols (such as Algorand) that have certain finality properties. Second, we formalize the idea that proof-of-work (PoW) protocols and non-PoW protocols can be distinguished by the forms of permission that users are given to carry out updates to the state.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access