Paper detail

Requirement Analyses and Evaluations of Blockchain Platforms per Possible Use Cases

It is said that blockchain will contribute to the digital transformation of society in a wide range of ways, from the management of public and private documents to the traceability in various industries, as well as digital currencies. A number of so-called blockchain platforms have been developed, and experiments and applications have been carried out on them. But are these platforms really conducive to practical use of the blockchain concept? To answer the question, we need to better understand what the technology called blockchain really is. We need to sort out the confusion we see in understanding what blockchain was invented for and what it means. We also need to clarify the structure of its applications. This document provides a generic model of understanding blockchain and its applications. We introduce design patterns to classify the platforms. We categorize possible use cases by identifying the structure among applications, and organize the functional, performance, operational and legal requirements for each such case. Based on the categorization and criteria, we evaluated and compared the following platforms: Hyperledger Fabric, Hyperledger Iroha, Hyperledger Indy, Ethereum, Quorum/Hyperledger Besu, Ethereum 2.0, Polkadot, Corda and BBc-1. We have tried to be fair in our evaluations and comparisons, but we also expect to provoke discussion. The intended readers for this document is anyone involved in development of application systems who wants to understand blockchain and their platforms, including non-engineers and non-technologists. The assessments in this document will allow readers to understand the technological requirements for the blockchain platforms, to question existing technologies, and to choose the appropriate platforms for the applications they envision. The comparisons hopefully will also be useful as a guide for designing new technologies.

preprint2021arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.