A lower bound for the time to assure interactive consistency
References (7)
- et al.
On describing the behavior and implementation of distributed systems
Theoret. Comput. Sci.
(1981) - et al.
Synchronization and matching in redundant systems
IEEE Trans. Comput. C-27
(1978) The Byzantine generals strike again
J. Algorithms
(1982)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.
Cited by (382)
Optimal algorithms for synchronous Byzantine k-set agreement
2023, Theoretical Computer ScienceSynchronous t-resilient consensus in arbitrary graphs
2023, Information and ComputationLeaderless consensus
2023, Journal of Parallel and Distributed ComputingA consensus protocol for unmanned aerial vehicle networks in the presence of Byzantine faults
2022, Computers and Electrical EngineeringCitation Excerpt :Moreover, Fischer and Lynch [25] point out that given a network consisting of some Byzantine faulty processors, if all the correct processors are unable to know which processor is faulty, and the number of Byzantine faulty processors is smaller than or equal to t (t =⌞(n-1)/3⌟, where n is the number of processors in the network), these correct processors can compute a consensus value after t + 1 rounds of message exchange. Our assumption for the failure type of fallible processors (i.e. UAVs) and the definition of a round is the same as those used in Fischer and Lynch [25]. Therefore, the maximum number of rounds required of the proposed UCP is ⌞(nO-1)/3⌟+1, where nO is the number of UAVs in the UAVNet.
Sublinear Message Bounds of Authenticated Implicit Byzantine Agreement
2024, ACM International Conference Proceeding SeriesOn the Round Complexity of Asynchronous Crusader Agreement
2024, Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics, LIPIcs
Copyright © 1982 Published by Elsevier B.V.