, and the others of $(1-p)$. We also consider the situation in which the others mine a block on the previously private branch (frequency $\gamma(1-p)$), and the others mine a block on the public branch (frequency $(1-\gamma)(1-p)$). Main result is an elaboration of an interval in which selfish miners will earn more than their relative mining power: 1) for a given $p$, a pool of size $p$ obtains a revenue larger than than its relative size for $p$ in the following range: $0 < p \le 0{.}429$ (the left bound corresponds to $\gamma =1$, and the right one — to $\gamma =0$); 2) for a given $p$, a pool of size $p$ obtains a revenue larger than a revenue of other group in the following range: $0{.}358 \le p \le 0{.}449$.
@article{PDM_2020_3_a4,
author = {A. V. Cheremushkin},
title = {Selfish mining strategy elaboration},
journal = {Prikladna\^a diskretna\^a matematika},
pages = {57--77},
year = {2020},
number = {3},
language = {ru},
url = {http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/item/PDM_2020_3_a4/}
}
A. V. Cheremushkin. Selfish mining strategy elaboration. Prikladnaâ diskretnaâ matematika, no. 3 (2020), pp. 57-77. http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/item/PDM_2020_3_a4/
[1] Ittay E., Emin G. S., Majority is Not Enough: Bitcoin Mining is Vulnerable, 2013, arXiv: 1311.0243 | Zbl
[2] Ittay E., Emin G. S., “Majority is not enough: bitcoin mining is vulnerable”, Financial Cryptography and Data Security, 18th Intern. Conf. (Christ Church, Barbados, March 3–7, 2014), 436–454 | Zbl
[3] Ittay E., Emin G. S., “Majority is not enough: bitcoin mining is vulnerable”, Commun. ACM, 61:7 (2018), 95–102 | DOI