Blockchain Papers

Follow blockchain research across journals, conferences, and preprint repositories.

3 papersLast indexed Aug 31, 2026
Search papers

Paper index

3 results · page 1 of 1

Clear filters
Aug 28, 2026·arXiv
0 cites
VeriTS: Verifiable Model-Enhanced Time-Series Queries on Blockchain Systems

Zhongming Yao, Jun Pang, Chenxu Wang, Qian Ma · 6 authors

Blockchain data is temporal. Every transaction carries a timestamp and the chain imposes a total order, so on-chain data forms per-source time-series streams. However, existing systems support only basic lookups on blocks and transactions, and cannot answer time-series queries such as time-range retrieval and windowed aggregation. Offloading queries off-chain restores expressiveness, but the off-chain query layer is untrusted, so results must be verifiable. To this end, we propose VeriTS, the first verifiable time-series query framework for blockchain systems. It supports efficient range and aggregation queries without altering blockchain storage structures. VeriTS maintains an off-chain query layer that represents each stream through an authenticated aggregate interval tree. The tree serves as the query index and as the authenticated data structure at once, so a windowed aggregate is answered by folding a logarithmic number of node aggregates. VeriTS verifies completeness through a minimum covering set and soundness through aggregate folding. It extends both guarantees to an approximate path over model segments, redefining completeness and soundness under bounded error. Miners validate a model's residual rather than replay its computation, so even an adversarial encoder can inflate proof size and answer width but never correctness. Experiments offer evidence that on windowed aggregation, VeriTS improves verification efficiency by more than two orders of magnitude over per-record proofs. Range-query proofs shrink by up to 14.5x.

Open access
cs.DB
Original source
Aug 28, 2026·Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
0 cites
PRE-GHR Series Map — Canonical Reference for the PRE-GHR Publication Series

Miaosheng Wang

Canonical reference map for the PRE-GHR publication series. Records every record in the series with its concept DOI, version history, and relational links; declares numbering conventions and known gaps; establishes citation and versioning standards. This map is itself a PRE-GHR series record. v33 (2026-08-28). Two changes. 1. PRE-GHR XXXIX v5.0 registered (version DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22145426; concept DOI 10.5281/zenodo.21889278 unchanged). v5.0 is the release version closing all six objections of an adversarial pre-submission review, one revision ticket each: Theorem 4 unilateralized with the converse demoted to an observation under an explicit complete-erasure assumption (R01); ledger counts restricted to lower witnesses, the ordering claim made conditional on a fixed normalization and full retention (R02); an explicit two-sided finite-sample bound replacing an expectation-only argument (R03); four empirical mappings corrected — schema-field disjointness separated from retained-trace intersection, join error reported two-sided with the earlier “directionally safe, never over-counting” claim withdrawn, overlap-error direction governed by an error budget, retention ratio restated in matched units (R04); measure-relative notation throughout (R05); subject classification reassessed and Related Work rebuilt (R06). This is the first subject-classification reversal recorded in this map: cs.MA is withdrawn as unsupported by the technical content — the formalism contains no agent population, strategic interaction, or equilibrium claim — and replaced by cs.CR primary with a cs.DB cross-list; Related Work now separates the lineage the paper inherits from (linked timestamping and distributed witnesses, split-view detection and the undefined gossip layer, existence-not-authenticity timestamping, provenance and lineage, record linkage, trace semantics, measure and order) from adjacent recent lines cited for comparison only, assigning priority to the sources where the paper's constructions proved to be rediscoveries. Two gaps are declared inherited rather than closed: the hash-chain anchor has no consistency-proof comparison mechanism, and the anchor-propagation layer is undefined in the source standard as well. 2. The AI-collaboration attribution note (drafted 2026-08-20, previously unpublished as a local v32.1 revision) is merged into this version. It records that papers in the series are drafted with AI assistance, that the author block is platform-plus-model double-written from XL v1.3 onward, and how the platform-only author line of earlier versions is to be read. On merge, the coverage clause of the writing-model statement was narrowed under red-pen review (2026-08-28): the claim's width is aligned to the strength of its evidence. The complement of the recorded provider-fallback events establishes that no fallback leg entered a paper-writing session; it does not establish per-paper model attribution for the entire series. The statement is therefore scoped to the drafting sessions of the pre-v1.3 papers named in the per-paper note, and the narrowing itself is recorded in the revision history so that the difference between the unpublished local note and this published version is auditable. Delivery-fingerprint discipline updated this day. A PDF's md5 is a build-instance fingerprint, not a content fingerprint: pdflatex writes /CreationDate and /ID on every build, so the same source compiled twice differs in md5 while the typeset content is identical (measured: 68 differing bytes, all inside that region). Deliverables in this series now carry file md5, a content fingerprint with the extractor and version named, page count and byte count, produced under a reproducible build with the embedded date pinned. Record count unchanged: 39 records (27 series-internal).

Open access
2 source records
Scientific Computing and Data Management
Cold Fusion and Nuclear Reactions
Probability and Statistical Research
Original source
Aug 28, 2026·Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
4 cites
PRE-GHR XXXIX: The Mathematics of δ₀ — Domain-Order Theory, Composition, and the Measurable Structure of the Irreducible Governance Residue

Miaosheng Wang

PRE-GHR XXXIX v5.0 (2026-08-28) — release version closing all six objections of an adversarial pre-submission review. PRE-GHR XXXVIII gave the series its first formal definition of the irreducible governance residue δ0μ(P) := inf over admissible P' of ||residue(P')|| and proved a bit-level lower bound. This paper builds the property theory. The mathematics is a domain-order theory: every inequality follows from how the admissible domain D(P) behaves under enlargement or composition of protocols. We prove monotonicity of δ0μ in the erasure surface, an exact composition law δ0μ(P1 ∘ P2) = δ0μ(P1) + δ0μ(P2) − |T(P1) ∩ T(P2)| under explicit hypotheses (segment autonomy, joint attainability, cross-segment cleanliness), and positivity δ0μ(P) > 0 whenever T(P) is non-empty as a purely normative fact, with Landauer's principle confined to the physical interpretation. We then ask what a running system's audit ledgers can measure. The answer is stratified: the ordering structure is measurable in principle — conditional on a fixed normalization and full retention — while the absolute value is stated relative to a fixed code-point measure, and the aggregate-to-single-protocol bridge remains open. No interception statistic is claimed to equal δ0μ; where the wall cannot be built, the gap is marked, not papered over. Changes in v5.0 (six revision tickets, R01–R06, each closing one reviewer objection): R01 — Theorem 4 unilateralized: the safe direction (T(P) non-empty ⇒ δ0μ > 0) remains a theorem; the converse is demoted to Observation 4.1 under an explicit complete-erasure assumption. A witness-reading remark records that δ0μ is a minimum witness cardinality in the sense of why-provenance, inherited and not claimed as new. R02 — ledger counts restricted to lower witnesses only: the ordering claim is measurable solely under a fixed normalization and full retention, stated as an explicit condition rather than an implicit assumption. R03 — the uniform-sampling remark now carries an explicit finite-sample bound (Hoeffding's inequality in its standard form), two-sided: “holds in expectation” is no longer used as if it held for a sample. R04 — four empirical mappings corrected: schema-field disjointness is separated from retained-trace intersection; the approximate join reports both false-negative and false-positive error (the earlier “directionally safe, never over-counting” claim is withdrawn); the overlap-error direction is declared two-sided and governed by an error budget rather than assumed away; and the retention ratio is restated as an interception-event ratio in matched units. R05 — measure-relative notation throughout: bits and code points are two measures on one trace universe, so every ordering claim is stated at a fixed μ and changing μ defines a new quantity rather than restating the old one. R06 — subject classification reassessed and Related Work rebuilt. The paper contains no multiagent model and no coordinated-interaction result; the earlier cs.MA classification is withdrawn as unsupported by the technical content, and the classification adopted here is cs.CR primary with cs.DB cross-list. Related Work now separates the lineage the paper inherits from — linked timestamping and distributed witnesses (Haber & Stornetta 1991; Bayer, Haber & Stornetta 1993), split-view detection and the undefined gossip layer (Certificate Transparency, RFC 6962 / RFC 9162), existence-not-authenticity timestamping (OpenTimestamps), provenance and lineage (W3C PROV; Buneman, Khanna & Tan 2001; Cui, Widom & Wiener 2000), record linkage (Fellegi & Sunter 1969), trace semantics (Hoare 1978; Brookes, Hoare & Roscoe 1984), and measure and order (Halmos; Davey & Priestley) — from adjacent recent lines cited for comparison only. Where a construction of this paper rediscovers an existing one, priority is assigned to the source and no originality is claimed. Honesty notes. Citations to Hoeffding, Fellegi & Sunter, Halmos, Davey & Priestley and the CSP literature are made at the level of the standard statement of each framework only, pending full-text verification. Two candidate references were deliberately excluded because their primary sources could not be verified. Two gaps are inherited rather than closed: the hash-chain anchor has no consistency-proof comparison mechanism, and the anchor-propagation (gossip) layer is undefined in the source standard as well. Open questions Q5.1, Q5.3 and Q5.4 remain declared open.

Open access
2 source records
Distributed systems and fault tolerance
Security and Verification in Computing
Access Control and Trust
Original source