The block chains are the distributed databases maintaining continuous growth of records ordered in lists called “blocks”. It is the public ledger of every Bitcoin transactions which have been executed. The “completed” blocks are incorporated to it leading to constant increase in size of the “block chains”. These blocks have been imposed over the blockchain in chronological order and linear manner.
The research would be conducted around “Bitcoins”. The “bitcoins” has been developed as rewards in competitions where users offer power of computing to authenticate and record transfer of data into block-chains. The study would not reveal any other cases supported by the block-chains like smart contracts and the licensing.
The study would describe the research. Then the evaluation of the contribution of block-chains with “bitcoins” has been discussed. A model to stimulate has been developed with its limitations and justifications. Lastly conclusion has been drawn on the key findings fitting to the research.
At first the topic “blockchain technology” in “Bitcoin” is defined. Then the area of “blockchain technology” in “Bitcoin” is unfolded. The areas that are not to be included in this research are mentioned. Lastly the general findings from “blockchain technology” in “Bitcoin” are revealed. In the next section, the fiend of the review has been described. After describing the research, evaluation is done on the contribution of the research that has been done to the area. Next the limitations of “blockchain technology” in “Bitcoin” are shown. Lastly the section ends by mentioning the values of the limitations in the project. Then the best solution for the present situation is given. It important features are discussed. Its quality and contribution to the given research field is analyzed. A model is drawn stimulating it. Lastly conclusion is drawn upon the key findings from the review of “blockchain technology” in “Bitcoin”.
Boyd &Carr, (2016) researched that “Blockchain” is the decentralized method for data transaction in “data management”. It was first designed for the “Bitcoin cryptocurrency”. The interest in this field originated since the idea has been coined in the year of 2008. The reason behind this was its core attributes providing data integrity, anonymity and security. This has been done in the absence of a third party organization that could manage its transactions. Thus it created attractive areas of research. This has been especially from the view point of limitations and technical challenges. A systematic mapping of the study with the aim of gathering every relevant research on the technology of lock-chain is set. The main aim has been the understanding of the present challenges, future directions and topics of the research. Various online journals are studies. That show focus on the “Bitcoin” systems. Most of the studies has been dealing with reveal and improve of the “Blockchains” from the security and privacy view-points. Several of the proposed solutions have been lacking concrete discussion on the effectiveness. Many scalability of Block-chain involving the latency and throughput has been kept unstudied.
Evaluation of the contribution of the research:The contribution of the research has been interesting to watch where it has been heading. Bitcoin has got many attentions in cryptocurrency. According to G?bel et al. (2016) more people has been buying and trading Bitcoins per day. Hence it has been crucial as a research topic. The research would attract the academia and industries to carry on further researches from both the technical and business perspectives. The Bitcoin has been the only solution to utilize the “Blockchain” technology. There has been various other cryptocurrencies currently who have been giving competition to Bitcoin. The future researches from this study might also involve other cryptocurrencies. The review would not only help in focusing on Bitcoin and the other cryptocurrencies but also highlight applications possible utilizing the solution of blockchain. Utilizing of decentralized scenario like the share of virtual properties could be a contribution of the research. This would revolutionize the approach in which the organizations would sell the products.
Gipp, Kosti&Breitinger (2016) states that as the solutions of blockchain are used for more users, it would appreciate the reviews like this done on the technical challenges and limitations. The increase in sizes and bases of users has triggered to conduct this type of researches relating to the scalability. Moreover, the research will leave its impact on the privacy and security concerns. This would give birth to inventions of new areas to prevent the disturbance on blockchains.
Limitations of the research:The systematic mapping of the research would enable the understanding of the present gaps in the research. Crosby et al., (2016) state thatone of the fundamental limitations on the study is relating to the publication bias. It refers that the problem that the positive outcomes are to be published more than that of the negative ones. This is because that the negative take much time to get published. Moreover, they have been less cited in the publications. Other limitation has been the “selection bias”. It refers to the distortion of the statistical analysis. This has been owing to the used criteria for selecting the publications. Lastly the there has been limitation regarding inaccuracy the extraction of data and the misclassification. This indicates the possibility of extraction of data differently by various reviewers.
Importance of the research gaps in the project:As researched by Zheng et al., (2016) this identification of systematic mapping of the research would help the practitioners and the researchers to concentrate on research areas that need more researches. The seeking of the gaps of research would reply the unanswered queries in the present technology of blockchain. The addressing of the publication issue has brought the usage of various scientific databases. This is done within the “search protocols” to seek maximum number of papers. This has raised the quantity of papers found for this study along with raising the possibility to seek the papers with negative outcomes. Nonetheless, the Blockchain innovation has been considered as another subject in the software engineering industry. It has been further distributed as white papers inside the companies. Thus, all exploration led on the specialized perspectives on Blockchain could not been incorporated in this mapping study. In any case, by using just logical databases as hotspots for finding significant research, papers are gathered of higher quality.
The issue of selection bias has been addressed by the developing o careful search protocols. Pilot searches could be done on various keywords ensuring what has been concluded from the study. Rigorous criteria for inclusion and the exclusion could be defined form this. This would ensure that every paper elected has been the section of the research topic (Bracamonte, Yamasaki & Okada, 2016). Most of the researches relating to the block-chain have been relevant to the regulation, legal and economic factors of Bitcoin with the possibility of its cryptocurrency.
The current selected solution at best:
The solution is the “data extraction” and “mapping process”. Matzuttet al., (2016) claimed is designed to gather data required to address the queries of research in this review. The data items collected are the basic information regarding the study. It includes the objectives and major findings from the study. It helps to organize and assess the data. The selection and search outcomes are found from the process. There has been the “Prisma-Flow” model provided with the process. Many journals have been retrieved initially as the search protocol designed has been registered to the scientific databases selected. The initial round on the inclusion and the exclusion has been lying on the basis of the titles of the papers retrieved. Various papers excluded have been discussed from the business view-point of Bitcoin. They have not been included in the study. Retrieval of numerous papers relevant to other scientific fields where the Blockchain has another definition than technology in computer science is done.
The most important features have been the identification of security, wasted resources, usability and privacy.
These have been good due to the identification of exchanging property of Bitcoin. This has caused economic harm for the clients.
This fit into the research was said by Karame (2016). This is because there is a scope of introducing the “audit software” to increase the usability in the Bitcoin exchanges. The aim of this software has been to deduce the solvency of exchange participants. This could be done without the publication of crucial data. There has been connection between the buyer and the seller with limited layer for anonymity. This prevents the buyers to find and validate data in Bitcoin. Different models could be presented through which the rating or reputation could be imposed conjoining the transactions of Bitcon. This considers every pros and cons. These aspects could be improved. This could be done on the network of Bitcoin. Thus the usability is improved delivering extra data for users who have been making transactions.
Limitations:Colombo (2016) argues that the technology of block-chain has certain challenges that are identified through the review. Several technical limitations identified in adapting the technology of block-chain in future are throughput, latency, bandwidth and size, security, wasted resources, usability and versioning with hard forks and multiple chains.
They have been the limitations for certain reasons. The potential issues throughput in the network of Bitcoin presently gets maximized to transactions per second. In order to develop enough protection for the transaction block of Bitcoin, it takes 10 minutes to finish a transaction roughly. In order to gain security efficiency, more time has to be spent in the blocks. This is because it has been outweighing the expense of couple of attacks. Currently the block-chain’s size in the network of Bitcoin has been over five hundred thousand megabytes. The community of Bitcoin assumes that the quantity of each block has been one mega bytes. The block has been created for every ten minutes. Dwyer (2016) discusses that this causes limitations in the quantity of transactions to be handled. In the security section the present block-chain at Bitcoin can have 51% attack.
The mining at Bitcoin has been wasting large quantity of energy about fifteen million dollars per day. This has been the reason of effort of “proof-of-work”. The API of Bitcoin to develop services has been hard to use. There has been the requirement to design an API for blockchain that is more developer-friendly. This resembles the REST APIs many times. Small chains that comprises of lower quantity of nodes possess high chances of fifty-one percent attack. Another problem arises as the chains have been split for versioning and administrative purposes (Krug & Peterson, 2015).
These limitations fit to the review as the blockchain posses the ability to alter the method of transactions. Moreover, the block-chain’s applications have not been limited to the crypto currencies. The data integrity attributes of security and the anonymity has been suffering from various restrictions and obstacles. They are assesses and resolved in this research. Scalability has been another problem which has been also mentioned in this study. This research would help in identifying the present status done by blockchain.
The research has continued to seek several problems and solutions to overcome the limitations of the technology of Block-chain. Most of the study has concentrated on addressing the challenges. Every block comprises of a timestamp. It comprises of links to previous blocks. As recorded once, the block-chains have been resistant inherently to any kind of modification of data. Maximum researches on block-chain of present day have been concerned about the security and privacy issues. It has conducted scalability problems on the Blockchain. The review has evaluated the ability of the solutions suggested in an aim of the evaluation criteria. The limitations are searched and the way it has been valuable to the project is found out. A suitable model is drawn justifying the best solution selected. Though various solutions to the limitations and solutions are presented but few of them has been just small proposals and lack strong assessment on the effectiveness.
Boyd, C., &Carr, C. (2016, July). Fair Client Puzzles from the Bitcoin Blockchain. In Australasian Conference on Information Security and Privacy (pp. 161-177). Springer International Publishing.
Bracamonte, V., Yamasaki, S., & Okada, H. (2016). A Discussion of Issues related to Electronic Voting Systems based on Blockchain Technology.
Colombo, R. J. (2016). Bitcoin: Hype or Harbinger. J. Int'l Bus. & L., 16, 1.
Crosby, M., Pattanayak, P., Verma, S., &Kalyanaraman, V. (2016). Blockchain technology: Beyond bitcoin. Applied Innovation, 2, 6-10.
Dwyer, G. P. (2016). Blockchain: A Primer.
English, S. M., &Nezhadian, E. (2017). Conditions of Full Disclosure: The Blockchain Remuneration Model. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.04196.
Ferrin, D. (2015). A Preliminary Field Guide for Bitcoin Transaction Patterns. In Proc. Texas Bitcoin Conf.
Gipp, B., Kosti, J., &Breitinger, C. (2016). Securing Video Integrity Using Decentralized Trusted Timestamping on the Bitcoin Blockchain.
G?bel, J., Keeler, H. P., Krzesinski, A. E., & Taylor, P. G. (2016). Bitcoin blockchain dynamics: The selfish-mine strategy in the presence of propagation delay. Performance Evaluation, 104, 23-41.
Hari, A., & Lakshman, T. V. (2016, November). The Internet Blockchain: A Distributed, Tamper-Resistant Transaction Framework for the Internet. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (pp. 204-210). ACM.
Karame, G. (2016, October). On the Security and Scalability of Bitcoin's Blockchain. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (pp. 1861-1862). ACM.
Krug, J., & Peterson, J. (2015). Sidecoin: a snapshot mechanism for bootstrapping a blockchain. arXiv preprint arXiv:1501.01039.
Matzutt, R., Hohlfeld, O., Henze, M., Rawiel, R., Ziegeldorf, J. H., &Wehrle, K. (2016, October). POSTER: I Don't Want That Content! On the Risks of Exploiting Bitcoin's Blockchain as a Content Store. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (pp. 1769-1771). ACM.
Miscione, G., & Kavanagh, D. (2015). Bitcoin and the Blockchain: A Coup D'?tat through Digital Heterotopia?.
Nugent, T., Upton, D., &Cimpoesu, M. (2016). Improving data transparency in clinical trials using blockchain smart contracts [version 1; referees: awaiting peer review].
Zheng, Z., Xie, S., Dai, H. N., & Wang, H. (2016). Blockchain Challenges and Opportunities: A Survey.