Papers › The quest for scaling BFT Consensus through Tree-Based Vote Aggregation
The quest for scaling BFT Consensus through Tree-Based Vote Aggregation
Ray Neiheiser, Miguel Matos, Luís Rodrigues
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
With the growing commercial interest in blockchain, permissioned implementations have received increasing attention. Unfortunately, existing BFT consensus protocols that are the backbone of permissioned blockchains, either scale poorly or offer limited throughput. Most of these algorithms require at least one process to receive and validate the votes from all other processes and then broadcast the result, which is inherently non-scalable. Some algorithms avoid this bottleneck by using aggregation trees to collect and validate votes. However, to the best of our knowledge, such algorithms offer limited throughput and degrade quickly in the presence of faults. In this paper we propose \thesystem, the first BFT communication abstraction that organizes participants in a tree to perform scalable vote aggregation and that, in faulty runs, is able to terminate the protocol within an optimal number of reconfigurations (f+1). We define precisely which aggregation trees allow for optimal reconfiguration and show that, unlike previous protocols, when using these configurations, \thesystem scales to large number of processes and outperforms HotStuff's throughput by up to 38x.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections