# Byzantine Agreement Wiki

This is a way to obtain the benefits of probabilistic finitude (the ability to always produce new blocks) and the demonstrable definitive (with a universal agreement on the canonical chain with no chance of conversion) in Polkadot. It also avoids the corresponding disadvantages of each mechanism (the ability to unknowingly follow the false fork in the probabilistic purpose, and a chance to be able to produce new blocks – for a demonstrable final purpose). By combining these two mechanisms, Polkadot allows the rapid creation of blocks and slowing down the purpose, executed in a separate process, to complete blocks without risking slower transaction processing or shutdown. A purely consensual blockchain of Nakamoto, which exploits PoW, is only capable of attaining the notion of probabilistic finalism and reaching a final consensus. Probabilistic finalism means that, on certain assumptions about the network and participants, if we see a few blocks that are based on a particular block, we can estimate the probability that it is definitive. Ultimately, consensus means that at some point or in the future, all nodes agree on the veracity of a data set. This potential consensus may be long and it will not be possible to determine how long it will last in advance. However, finalist gadgets such as GRANDPA or Ethereums Casper FFG are designed to provide stronger and faster guarantees about the purpose of the blocks, especially as they can never be cancelled after a byzantine chord process. The notion of irreversible consensus is described as demonstrable. In computer processing, the problem of the two generals is a thought experiment designed to illustrate the pitfalls and design challenges of trying to coordinate an action through communication via an unreliable connection. In the experiment, two generals are only able to communicate with each other by sending a messenger into enemy territory.

Experience asks how they could reach an agreement on the time of the attack, when they know that any messenger they send could be captured. This requires private channels of information, so we have the random secrets of overlaying | replace φ ⟩ – 1 n ∑ a 0 n n | a “display style” ⟩| “| {1}” in which the state is coded with a quantum verifiable secret sharing protocol (QVSS). [5] We cannot distribute the state| ϕ , ϕ , … φ ⟩, | display style “`phi` To prevent bad players from doing this, we encode the state with the verifiable Secret Sharing Quantum (QVSS) and send each player its share of the secret. Here too, the revision requires a Byzantine arrangement, but just replace the agreement with the Grad Cast protocol. [6] [7] In this subsection, we show how to use an algorithm that solves Byzantine chords for entries in `0, 1` as a subroutine to resolve the byzantine general agreement. The overhead is only 2 additional rounds, 2 n2 additional messages and O (b-n-2) communication bits. This can lead to a significant saving of the total number of bits that need to be communicated, as it is not necessary to send V-shaped values, but only binary values during the execution of the subroutine.