Before Ethereum made the "oracle problem" a household term, Bitcoin already had oracles serving as feeds, key-release services, federated signers, and arbiters that carried real value on the main chain. This study traces their use and the changing evidence of oracle activity from early days through July 2026. We combine a complete census of Counterparty betting (1,149 bets), analysis of the full Bitcoin chain through block 958,628, and searches for documented keys from Reality Keys, Orisi, Bitrated, and Oraclize in an 854-million-row public-key index. We also recover DLC oracle records from an archived explorer and live Nostr relays. Two results emerge. First, early contracts remain on-chain, but many event descriptions have disappeared, and protocol encoding and API limitations complicate access to the surviving record. However, for modern DLCs, public oracle announcements can survive even when the contracts using them cannot be identified on-chain. In the script classes examined, the share of spends that reveal no script peaks at 81.9% in 2024 after excluding spends containing inscription data. Second, public registries can give a misleading picture of oracle use. In Counterparty, 95% of pre-2018 sources declaring an oracle fee were never bet on. In Bitrated, 0.1% of archived keys appear on-chain overall, compared with 10 of 19 keys captured in 2014. Sport dominates Counterparty's matched volume, while a daily price series dominates the archived DLC announcements. These findings show how protocol design and data preservation shape the historical record of Bitcoin oracle use.

최근 개정: 2026. 10. 8.. 논문과 버전 기록 읽기 ↗

Ethereum's electricity use fell by about 99.95% after the move from proof of work to proof of stake. Service providers still need to report operational energy use, e.g. under the EU Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCAR). Existing estimates either apply one typical wattage to every node or start from aggregated monitoring counts. Both ignore attributes that nodes already advertise on the peer-to-peer network: client software, ARM or x86 hardware, hosting location, and validator role. We crawl the consensus and execution layers, assign each peer a wattage from those attributes using published measurements, and estimate the remaining incomplete peers with a Random Forest. On 6,934 peers from two Nebula crawls (19 and 22 June 2026), reachable nodes sum to 415 kW, or 3.63 GWh if that draw were held for a year. The same Lighthouse+Nethermind x86 wattage on every peer yields 431 kW. Observed attributes lower the total by 3.9%, mainly because nodes at Hetzner and other non-AWS clouds draw less than that home-desktop figure. AWS accounts for 15.6% of watts from 12.2% of peers, and validator-flagged nodes for 31.4% of watts from 25.7% of peers. The 415 kW snapshot is about 46% of the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance (CCAF) estimate of about 0.90 MW. Both use about 60 W per node, so the gap is mostly how many nodes each estimate includes. Rules cover 3,110 peers and the forest the other 3,824. On held-out labeled peers with client, architecture, and OS hidden, the forest's mean absolute error against the rule wattage is 4.3 W. Twenty-four-hour measurements on a gaming desktop differ from the predictions. After subtracting a 33 W idle graphics card that Ethereum clients do not need, both differences fall to about 19%.

최근 개정: 2026. 10. 2.. 논문과 버전 기록 읽기 ↗

Decentralized finance (DeFi) vaults are smart-contract-based asset management systems that pool deposits, execute programmable strategies, and mint tokenized shares representing claims on underlying assets and strategy performance. As vault designs have evolved from early yield aggregators to modular, actively managed systems, a new control layer, curation, has emerged to select strategies, configure risk parameters, and coordinate operational execution, introducing principal-agent dynamics and new failure modes. This paper systematizes DeFi vault architectures and curator-mediated control planes through (i) a unified system model and formal definitions for share accounting, roles, and operational dependencies, and (ii) three complementary taxonomies covering vault exposures and objectives, curator governance and accountability mechanisms, and strategy execution patterns together with their failure modes. We further map a representative set of production protocols to the proposed dimensions. The frameworks in this work aim to support rigorous analysis and safer design of blockchain-based financial applications.

최근 개정: 2026. 10. 1.. 논문과 버전 기록 읽기 ↗

As lotteries and other high-stakes decentralized applications increasingly depend on unpredictable randomness for their operations, the lack of a secure and transparent on-chain random number generator that is verifiable by all participants remains a critical open problem. Various approaches to blockchain-based random number generation have emerged over the years, each with their own strengths and limitations, and have consistently been superseded as blockchain technology evolved. This paper surveys existing approaches to on-chain randomness and proposes a new platform that builds upon the well-known commit-and-reveal scheme while directly addressing its principal vulnerability, the last revealer attack, in which the final participant can withhold their reveal in order to bias or abort the output upon seeing an unfavorable result. We further compare this solution with prior approaches and evaluate its entropy properties. The proposed architecture combines a web-based front-end with a Solidity smart contract deployed on the Polygon 2.0 blockchain. Implemented and tested on the Amoy testnet, the prototype is low-cost and simple to deploy, providing a practical, accessible proof-of-concept for verifiable on-chain randomness.

최근 개정: 2026. 9. 25.. 논문과 버전 기록 읽기 ↗