Skip to main content

Fast Probabilistic Consensus with Weighted Votes

Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC,volume 1289)


The fast probabilistic consensus (FPC) is a voting consensus protocol that is robust and efficient in Byzantine infrastructure. We propose an adaption of the FPC to a setting where the voting power is proportional to the nodes reputations. We model the reputation using a Zipf law and show using simulations that the performance of the protocol in Byzantine infrastructure increases with the Zipf exponent. Moreover, we propose several improvements of the FPC that decrease the failure rates significantly and allow the protocol to withstand adversaries with higher weight. We distinguish between cautious and berserk strategies of the adversaries and propose an efficient method to detect the more harmful berserk strategies. Our study refers at several points to a specific implementation of the IOTA protocol, but the principal results hold for general implementations of reputation models.


  • Distributed systems
  • Consensus protocols
  • Fairness
  • Sybil attack
  • Byzantine infrastructures
  • Simulation studies

S. Müller and A. Penzkofer—Contributed equally.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-63089-8_24
  • Chapter length: 19 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
USD   269.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-63089-8
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   349.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 7.


  1. 1.

  2. 2.

    This assumption is only made for sake of a better presentation; a node does not need to know every other node in the network. While the theoretical results in [11] are proven under this assumption, simulation studies [2] indicate that it is sufficient if every node knows about half of the other nodes. Moreover, it seems to be a reasonable assumption that large mana nodes are known to every participant in the network.

  3. 3.

    Interesting to note here that these three distributions are highly compatible with each other.

  4. 4.

    This is a common phenomenon for stochastic processes in random media; e.g., see [6].

  5. 5.


  1. Barborak, M., Dahbura, A., Malek, M.: The consensus problem in fault-tolerant computing. ACM Comput. Surv. 25(2), 171–220 (1993)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  2. Capossele, A., Mueller, S., Penzkofer, A.: Robustness and efficiency of leaderless probabilistic consensus protocols within Byzantine infrastructures (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Castellano, C., Fortunato, S., Loreto, V.: Statistical physics of social dynamics. Rev. Mod. Phys. 81(2), 591 (2009)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  4. Condorcet, J.A.N.: Essai sur l’application de l’analyse à la probabilité des décisions rendues à la pluralité des voix. De l’Imprimerie Royal (1785)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cruise, J., Ganesh, A.: Probabilistic consensus via polling and majority rules. Queueing Syst. 78(2), 99–120 (2014)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. den Hollander, F.: Large Deviations. Fields Institute Monographs. 14. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Jones, C.I.: Pareto and Piketty: The macroeconomics of top income and wealth inequality. J. Econ. Perspect. 29(1), 29–46 (2015)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  8. Kondor, D., Pósfai, M., Csabai, I., Vattay, G.: Do the rich get richer? an empirical analysis of the bitcoin transaction network. PloS one 9, e86197 (2014)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  9. Müller, S., Penzkofer, A., Camargo, D., Saa, O.: On fairness in voting consensus protocols (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Levine, B.N., Shields, C., Margolin, N.B.: A survey of solutions to the sybil attack (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Popov, S., Buchanan, W.J.: FPC-BI: Fast Probabilistic Consensus within Byzantine Infrastructures (2019).

  12. Popov, S., Moog, H., Camargo, D., Capossele, A., Dimitrov, V., Gal, A., Greve, A., Kusmierz, B., Mueller, S., Penzkofer, A., Saa, O., William, S., Wolfgang W., Vidal, A.: The coordicide, Luigi Vigneri (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Raj, D., Khamis, S.H.: Some remarks on sampling with replacement. Ann. Math. Statist. 29(2), 550–557 (1958)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  14. Sarwar, S., Marco-Gisbert, H.: Assessing blockchain consensus and security mechanisms against the 51% attack. Appl. Sci. 9, 1788 (2019)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  15. Tao, T.: Benford’s law, Zipf’s law, and the Pareto distribution.

Download references


We are grateful to all members of the coordicide team for countless valuable discussions and comments on earlier versions of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sebastian Müller .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Müller, S., Penzkofer, A., Kuśmierz, B., Camargo, D., Buchanan, W.J. (2021). Fast Probabilistic Consensus with Weighted Votes. In: Arai, K., Kapoor, S., Bhatia, R. (eds) Proceedings of the Future Technologies Conference (FTC) 2020, Volume 2 . FTC 2020. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 1289. Springer, Cham.

Download citation