The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Asynchronous consensus and broadcast protocols
Open accessAbstract
A consensus protocol enables a system of n asynchronous processes, some of which are faulty, to reach agreement. There are two kinds of faulty processes: fail-stop processes that can only die and malicious processes that can also send false messages. The class of asynchronous systems with fair schedulers is defined, and consensus protocols that terminate with probability 1 for these systems are investigated. With fail-stop processes, it is shown that ⌈( n + 1)/2⌉ correct processes are necessary and sufficient to reach agreement. In the malicious case, it is shown that ⌈(2 n + 1)/3⌉ correct processes are necessary and sufficient to reach agreement. This is contrasted with an earlier result, stating that there is no consensus protocol for the fail-stop case that always terminates within a bounded number of steps, even if only one process can fail. The possibility of reliable broadcast (Byzantine Agreement) in asynchronous systems is also investigated. Asynchronous Byzantine Agreement is defined, and it is shown that ⌈(2 n + 1)/3⌉ correct processes are necessary and sufficient to achieve it.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Byzantine generals problem
Lamport, L., Shostak, R., & Pease, M. (1982) · ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems · doi:10.1145/357172.357176 · Cited by 6,023
Cited by
Hyperledger fabric: a distributed operating system for permissioned blockchains
Androulaki, E., Barger, A., Bortnikov, V., Cachin, C., Christidis, K., De Caro, A., Enyeart, D., Ferris, C., Laventman, G., Manevich, Y., et al. (2018) · Proceedings of the Thirteenth EuroSys Conference · doi:10.1145/3190508.3190538 · Cited by 3,654
Practical byzantine fault tolerance and proactive recovery
Castro, M., & Liskov, B. (2002) · ACM Transactions on Computer Systems · doi:10.1145/571637.571640 · Cited by 2,475
Survey on blockchain for Internet of Things
Wang, X., Zha, X., Ni, W., Liu, R. P., Guo, Y. J., Niu, X., & Zheng, K. (2019) · Computer Communications · doi:10.1016/j.comcom.2019.01.006 · Cited by 567
Hyperledger Fabric: A Distributed Operating System for Permissioned Blockchains
Androulaki, E., Barger, A., Bortnikov, V., Cachin, C., Christidis, K., De, A., Enyeart, D., Ferris, C., Laventman, G., Manevich, Y., et al. (2018) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1801.10228 · Cited by 499
Metadata
- Authors
- Bracha, G., & Toueg, S.
- Venue
- Journal of the ACM
- Published
- 1985-10
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 824-840
- ISSN
- 0004-5411 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-735X
- OpenAlex
- W2073126252
- Cited by
- 513
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Asynchronous consensus and broadcast protocols. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/4221.214134
- The paper
- Bracha, G., & Toueg, S. (1985). Asynchronous consensus and broadcast protocols. Journal of the ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/4221.214134
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
