mirror of
https://github.com/lux-apps/papers.git
synced 2026-11-02 11:39:52 +00:00
The seven engine specifications (lux-{photon,wave,nova,nebula,prism,ray,field}-protocol)
were fragmented short notes documenting layers of the same Quasar consensus stack.
This commit merges them into a single canonical reference, lux-consensus-engines.tex,
that uses one preamble, one set of theorems, one bibliography, and one composition
chapter showing how the engines layer into the LP-020 finality pipeline.
The seven originals are reduced to single-page breadcrumb stubs pointing at the
consolidated paper; their sections/ content is preserved on disk for git history.
- new: lux-consensus-engines/ (50 pages, 646KB PDF, ~2900 lines tex)
- breadcrumbs: each original keeps cover + title + stub paragraph naming its chapter
- composition: chapter 9 records the layered contract Photon < Wave < Nova < ...
- bibliography: consolidated from the seven original thebibliography blocks
64 lines
2.9 KiB
TeX
64 lines
2.9 KiB
TeX
\section{Byzantine Fault Tolerance}
|
|
|
|
\label{sec:wave-byzantine}
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Adversarial Influence on Sampling}
|
|
|
|
A Byzantine adversary controlling fraction $\gamma < 1/3$ of validators can influence
|
|
the sampling process in two ways:
|
|
\begin{enumerate}[nosep]
|
|
\item \textbf{Equivocation}: Respond with different colors to different queries.
|
|
\item \textbf{Strategic silence}: Refuse to respond, forcing resampling.
|
|
\end{enumerate}
|
|
|
|
\begin{theorem}[Byzantine Safety]
|
|
\label{thm:wave-byz-safety}
|
|
Under the Wave protocol with $f < n/3$ Byzantine validators, if two honest validators
|
|
$v_i$ and $v_j$ both finalize (i.e., some $d_c \geq \beta_1$), they finalize the same
|
|
color with probability at least $1 - 2 \cdot (q_0/q_1)^{\beta_1}$.
|
|
\end{theorem}
|
|
|
|
\begin{proof}
|
|
Suppose for contradiction that $v_i$ finalizes color 1 and $v_j$ finalizes color 0.
|
|
Then $d_1(v_i) \geq \beta_1$ and $d_0(v_j) \geq \beta_1$.
|
|
|
|
For $v_i$ to observe $\beta_1$ supermajority rounds for color 1, at least $\beta_1$ of
|
|
its samples must have $\geq \alpha k$ color-1 responses. Since samples include at least
|
|
$(1-\gamma)k$ honest validators in expectation, and honest validators respond consistently,
|
|
this requires the honest majority to prefer color 1 during those rounds.
|
|
|
|
Similarly, for $v_j$ to observe $\beta_1$ supermajority rounds for color 0, the honest
|
|
majority must prefer color 0 during those rounds.
|
|
|
|
But Theorem~\ref{thm:wave-convergence} shows that the honest population converges to a single
|
|
color in $O(\log n)$ rounds. After convergence, the probability of sampling a supermajority
|
|
for the minority color is $q_0 < e^{-\Omega(k)}$. The probability that both events occur
|
|
(one validator sees $\beta_1$ supermajorities for each opposing color) is bounded by:
|
|
\[
|
|
\Pr[\text{safety violation}] \leq 2 \cdot q_0^{\beta_1} \leq 2 \cdot e^{-\Omega(k \beta_1)}
|
|
\]
|
|
For $k = 20$ and $\beta_1 = 11$, this is $2 \cdot e^{-\Omega(220)} \ll 2^{-128}$.
|
|
\end{proof}
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Liveness Under Byzantine Faults}
|
|
|
|
\begin{lemma}[Wave Liveness]
|
|
\label{lem:wave-liveness}
|
|
Under partial synchrony, the Wave protocol achieves liveness after GST: every submitted
|
|
valid transaction is eventually finalized.
|
|
\end{lemma}
|
|
|
|
\begin{proof}
|
|
After GST, messages are delivered within $\Delta$. An honest validator initiating a query
|
|
receives $\geq k - f$ honest responses within $\Delta + \text{round time}$. Since
|
|
$k - f > \alpha k$ for appropriate $k$ and $\alpha$ (e.g., $k = 20$, $f \leq 6$, $\alpha k = 16$),
|
|
honest responses alone can form a supermajority. The honest majority ensures convergence
|
|
(Theorem~\ref{thm:wave-convergence}), and once converged, the confidence counter reaches $\beta_1$
|
|
in $O(\beta_1)$ additional rounds (Lemma~\ref{lem:wave-absorption}). Thus finalization occurs
|
|
in $O(\log n + \beta_1)$ rounds after GST.
|
|
\end{proof}
|
|
|
|
%% -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
%% 8. EVALUATION
|
|
%% -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|