Papers › Time-Variant Proof-of-Work Using Error-Correction Codes
Time-Variant Proof-of-Work Using Error-Correction Codes
Sangjun Park, Haeung Choi, Heung-No Lee
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.
The protocol for cryptocurrencies can be divided into three parts, namely consensus, wallet, and networking overlay. The aim of the consensus part is to bring trustless rational peer-to-peer nodes to an agreement to the current status of the blockchain. The status must be updated through valid transactions. A proof-of-work (PoW) based consensus mechanism has been proven to be secure and robust owing to its simple rule and has served as a firm foundation for cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum. Specialized mining devices have emerged, as rational miners aim to maximize profit, and caused two problems: i) the re-centralization of a mining market and ii) the huge energy spending in mining. In this paper, we aim to propose a new PoW called Error-Correction Codes PoW (ECCPoW) where the error-correction codes and their decoder can be utilized for PoW. In ECCPoW, puzzles can be intentionally generated to vary from block to block, leading to a time-variant puzzle generation mechanism. This mechanism is useful in repressing the emergence of the specialized mining devices. It can serve as a solution to the two problems of recentralization and energy spending.
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